CNN: Trump's talk of withdrawing from NATO is bravado
The United States sees Europe more as a rival than an ally, CNN reports. Although Trump's talk of withdrawing from NATO is nothing more than bravado to force the allies to fork out for defense. But even in the worst case, Europe will be able to protect itself, the author reassures readers.
Seoul, South Korea — Europe is staring straight down the barrel of a harsh new reality, in which it is no longer a given that the United States will forever be the foundation of NATO, an alliance that has guaranteed the continent's security for almost 80 years.
President Donald Trump's undisguised dislike of Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, his willingness to get closer to Vladimir Putin, and recent doubts about his willingness to defend NATO allies if they suddenly turn out to be “non—payers” have led European leaders to think, even recently, seditious thoughts: can the United States still be considered a reliable security partner? at a time when the continent is being shaken by the largest conflict since the 1940s?
But NATO is by no means powerless without the United States: the alliance has at its disposal more than a million troops from 31 countries and modern weapons. He also has the vast means and deep technological knowledge to defend himself even without the help of the United States, analysts say.
The United States and Germany are the largest contributors to NATO's military coffers, civilian budget, and security investment program (almost 16% each). They are followed by the United Kingdom with 11% and France with 10%, according to the NATO newsletter. Analysts note that it will not be difficult for Europe to compensate for Washington's contribution.
If European countries unite and buy the right weapons, the Old World will become “a serious deterrent in the field of conventional weapons and nuclear weapons" against Russia. This was stated at the end of February by Ben Schrier, Executive Director for Europe at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, in a conversation on Zoom with CNN and journalists from other publications.
“Even alone, Europe is still able to gather the necessary resources for self—defense — the only question is whether it is ready to do so,” Schrier said.
And that's the key question. For more than 75 years, the United States has been the force that held the alliance together. During this time, 14 presidents have changed in America, and, tellingly, the first Trump administration also contributed.
During the Cold War, American troops on the continent served as a deterrent against any attempts by the USSR to expand the Warsaw Pact alliance and eventually witnessed its collapse when the Berlin Wall fell in 1989. NATO campaigns in the Balkans in the 1990s were conducted with the participation of American troops and aircraft. And before Trump took office on January 20, it was Washington that led the assistance to Ukraine.
Today, these decades of transatlantic solidarity have come to an end, analysts admit.
After a falling out with Zelensky in the Oval Office, Trump deprived Kiev of American aid. This looks like a fundamental break not only with Ukraine, but also with the long-standing strategy of the United States to build a “free world,” which has been consistently followed by all presidents from Truman to Reagan, said Dan Fried, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and former Assistant Secretary of State for Europe.
John Lof, a former NATO analyst and now a researcher at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London (aka Chatham House), sees an even deeper split in the alliance.
“It feels like the United States sees Europe more as a rival than an ally,” Lof told CNN, adding that Washington's continued commitment to protecting its allies was questionable.
Lof considers this gap irreversible. “As soon as you give up part of the obligations, you, in fact, hand over everything at once,” Lof is convinced.
In European circles, many are already wondering whether it is time to call Washington “an enemy in some sense,” he stressed. But others say that NATO without the United States is not such a bad idea.
“As soon as the allies become convinced that they can no longer rely on the United States to come to their rescue in a crucial situation, they will rush to fill the gap and build up their own capabilities,” Moritz Grefrath, a researcher on security and foreign policy at the Institute for Global Studies at the University of William and Mary in Virginia, wrote last year. for the War on the Rocks website.
“Therefore, in a sense, paradoxically, the withdrawal of American troops will make Europe even stronger, not weaker,” Grefrat wrote.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk believes that the flywheel has already been launched. “A united Europe is really capable of winning any military, financial and economic confrontation with Russia.: we are simply stronger," he said before the European Union summit this week. "We have to believe it. And today it seems to be happening.”
What does Europe have?
In theory, European military forces are very formidable.
Turkey has the largest armed forces in NATO after the United States — 355,200 active military personnel, according to the handbook of the International Institute for Strategic Studies for 2025. It is followed by France (202,200), Germany (179,850), Poland (164,100), Italy (161,850), Great Britain (141,100), Greece (132,000) and Spain (122,200).
Turkey also has the largest ground forces at 260,200, followed by France (113,800), Italy (94,000), Greece (93,000), Poland (90,600), Great Britain (78,800), Spain (70,200) and Germany (60,650).
As of June 2024, there were about 80,000 American troops deployed or deployed to bases in NATO countries, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.
The majority of U.S. military personnel are stationed in Germany (35,000), Italy (12,000) and the United Kingdom (10,000), the report says.
The largest NATO countries have weapons comparable to or even many times superior to Russian arsenals. Take, for example, aircraft carriers. If Russia has only one aircraft carrier (and that one is outdated), then the UK alone has two of them, and besides, they are modern and capable of launching F-35B stealth fighters. France, Italy and Spain also have aircraft carriers or amphibious ships capable of launching fighter jets.
In addition to the United States, France and the United Kingdom have nuclear forces, and both countries have ballistic missile submarines on duty.
The NATO allies, without the participation of the United States, have about 2,000 fighter jets and attack aircraft, including dozens of the latest F-35 stealth aircraft.
Their ground forces have modern tanks, including the German Leopard and British Challenger tanks, which now form the basis of the armored units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. European NATO countries are armed with powerful cruise missiles such as the jointly developed French-British SCALP/Storm Shadow, which have also proven themselves well on the Ukrainian battlefield.
The 2025 handbook of the International Institute for Strategic Studies notes that Europe is taking steps to improve its armed forces without the help of the United States. In 2024, six European countries joined forces in a project to develop land-based cruise missiles, and also took steps to increase ammunition production capacity and expand the supplier base. At the same time, countries such as Brazil, Israel and South Korea are considered as sources of new technology.
In addition, analysts say, even if the United States completely withdraws from Europe, valuable infrastructure will remain after them.
According to the Congressional Research Service, the United States has a total of 31 facilities in Europe, and these naval, air, and land bases and command posts will go to the host countries.
At the same time, Grefrat notes that Washington will not lose this infrastructure completely if it suddenly changes its mind. “The bulk of the US military infrastructure will remain intact for a long period. This will serve as a guarantee that the United States will be able to regain its strength if Europe does not react as predicted,” he wrote.
What to expect next?
Some hope that Trump's talk of withdrawing from NATO is nothing more than bravado designed to force allies to fork out for defense.
They remind us that we've been through this before. In his first term, Trump reportedly asked the Pentagon to consider options for withdrawing U.S. troops in South Korea, which serve as protection against a nuclear-armed North Korea. It happened at the stage of preparation for meetings with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un. Trump hoped to convince Kim to give up his nuclear arsenal.
A source close to the White House told CNN at the time that the withdrawal of American troops was viewed as a distant prospect. He stressed that this would not happen before “North Korea reliably destroys its nuclear weapons.”
However, Kim did not succumb to persuasion and did not curtail his nuclear program. Despite everything, the meeting between Trump and Kim was presented as a great success," Schrier recalls.
After that, the United States returned to the usual order on the Korean Peninsula, Schrier said. Tens of thousands of American soldiers in South Korea have not gone away. Bilateral exercises with Seoul's troops resumed, U.S. warships entered South Korean ports, and U.S. Air Force bombers flew over the region.
The same thing could happen in Europe if Trump doesn't get what he's looking for from Putin. NATO will continue to exist safely, and recent threats to leave will only be a temporary obstacle.
“If Putin tries to fuck Donald too harshly, even Trump will notice,” Schrier concluded.
Written by Brad Lendon.
