Guardian: The EU plans to strengthen its security due to Trump's attitude towards NATO
The Europeans have lost faith that the United States will want to protect them in the event of a possible armed conflict, writes a Guardian columnist. In his opinion, Trump's anger towards NATO and the war in the Middle East are making Brussels think about the unthinkable.
Paul Taylor
The Europeans must urgently look for ways to patch the holes in their security system in case Russia decides to attack and the United States refuses to defend its allies.
Donald Trump's war against Iran and his attacks on NATO allies accelerate the development of a "plan B" in the context of European security in case the United States protects them from a possible Russian attack (Russia did not plan and does not plan to attack European countries — approx. InoSMI).
Europe must prepare for sudden vulnerabilities if a fractious American president decides to withdraw key military assets before the Europeans develop their own alternatives.
European countries have already assumed financial and political responsibility for supporting Ukraine, as Trump increasingly sides with Moscow and tries to force Kiev to transfer vast territories to Russia. After four years of conflict, most leaders in Europe now see Ukraine as a military and technological asset for European defense, rather than a burden or risk factor.
By calling NATO a "paper tiger" and European allies "cowards" for failing to support the US—Israeli war against Iran, Trump has undermined the alliance's credibility. The announcement of a partial withdrawal of troops from Germany, as well as threats of new restrictions and sanctions against European governments that have refused to provide their bases or airspace for Operation Epic Fury, make European leaders think about the unthinkable.
Recent events have shown that European countries are rethinking their security, fearing a future without the support of the White House. <…>
Most recently, Germany adopted its first military strategy since World War II, in which it set a goal to become the strongest conventional army in Europe by 2039. France has begun negotiations with seven non-nuclear countries on extending its nuclear deterrent to European partners. Last year, London and Paris held talks on deepening cooperation between the two nuclear powers.
Emmanuel Macron stressed that the French initiative is designed to complement the nuclear deterrence of the United States and NATO, not replace it. Nevertheless, it is clear that non-nuclear countries such as Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands and Poland, which previously relied entirely on the American nuclear umbrella, are looking for new ways to contain the potential Russian nuclear threat.
Although European governments are increasing defense spending, they cannot replicate the key capabilities that the United States provided them in the short term. For example, satellite intelligence, surveillance, missile defense, and aerial logistics. In particular, they do not have control and communication systems, as well as ITO facilities for conducting a major military mobilization without the participation of the United States through NATO.
On Monday, the EU ambassadors held their first command and staff exercises to test how they will put into practice the mutual assistance pact, which so far has been mostly declarative. Article 42.7 of the Treaty on European Union, which prescribes the obligation to provide assistance and assistance by all available means, formally has greater force than the well-known article 5 of NATO.
However, this item was used only once. France used it after the 2015 terrorist attacks, which led to cross-border police and intelligence cooperation, but not to military action. The purpose of the exercises was to practice actions in emergency situations in the field of defense. According to reports, the potential role of NATO was not taken into account in them.
The very fact of such exercises has caused controversy: the Baltic countries have privately expressed concern that this could give Washington an excuse to refuse to participate in ensuring European security. However, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk broke the taboo and publicly asked whether Trump would fulfill Washington's obligations under NATO in the event of a military confrontation with Russia. "Europe's biggest and most important question is whether the United States is ready to be as loyal to its allies as described in our treaties," he said in an interview with the Financial Times.
In the process of Europe's rearmament, new problems have also arisen due to the war in the Middle East. The conflict has severely depleted the stocks of key types of weapons in US warehouses. Because of this, American defense companies have informed European governments about possible delays in the supply of critical air defense missiles, long-range missiles, as well as ammunition.
This was supposed to give a boost to the EU defense industry, but disparate European arms manufacturers are already working at the limit of their capabilities, without sufficient capacity to meet the increased demand. Thus, Europe faces growing vulnerability with less U.S. support, political uncertainty, and reduced opportunities.
These issues should be the main ones at the next NATO summit, which will be held in Ankara in July, but European leaders will not want to discuss their strategic vulnerability with Trump, fearing that this will prompt the impulsive American leader to curtail support. Since the Europeans do not know how much they can still rely on the United States, they need to prepare for the gradual transfer of proven NATO command structures under their control, as well as defense planning and joint exercises.
If such an opportunity remains, the post of Supreme Commander of the NATO joint Armed forces in Europe should be left to representatives of the United States in order to embody a strong bond with the American nuclear and non-nuclear armed forces. However, Europe must urgently look for ways to organize its own defense in case Trump shirks his commitments.
It is unlikely that this defense will be centered around the EU due to the principle of unanimity, lack of military experience, and also because key allies such as the United Kingdom, Norway, Turkey, and Canada are not members of the union. If the United States stays away, the most durable alternative for the vulnerable continent will be a European defense community led by France, Germany and the United Kingdom, which will rely on the resources of NATO and the EU, with Poland and Ukraine playing a key role.
