Europeans concerned U.S. will withdraw support from NATO; Americans should be, too
The United States has long played a leadership role in NATO, the most successful military alliance in history.
The U.S. and 11 other countries in North America and Europe founded NATO in 1949, following World War II. NATO has since grown its membership to include 32 countries in Europe and North America.
But now, European leaders and politicians fear the United States has become a less reliable ally, posing major challenges for Europe and, by implication, NATO.
This concern is not unfounded.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly spoken of a desire to seize Greenland, which is an autonomous territory of Denmark, a NATO member. He has declared that Canada, another NATO member, should become 'the 51st state.' Trump has also sided with Russia at the United Nations and said that the European Union, the political and economic group uniting 27 European countries, was designed to 'screw' the U.S.
Still, Trump – as well as other senior U.S. government officials – has said that the U.S. remains committed to staying in and supporting NATO.
For decades, both liberal and conservative American politicians have recognized that the U.S. strengthens its own military and economic interests by being a leader in NATO – and by keeping thousands of U.S. troops based in Europe to underwrite its commitment.
Understanding NATO
The U.S., Canada and 10 Western European countries formed NATO nearly 80 years ago as a way to help maintain peace and stability in Europe following World War II. NATO helped European and North American countries bind together and defend themselves against the threat once posed by the Soviet Union, a former communist empire that fell in 1991.
NATO employs about 2,000 people at its headquarters in Brussels. It does not have its own military troops and relies on its 32 member countries to volunteer their own military forces to conduct operations and other tasks under NATO's leadership.
NATO does have its own military command structure, led by an American military officer, and including military officers from other countries. This team plans and executes all NATO military operations.
In peacetime, military forces working with NATO conduct training exercises across Eastern Europe and other places to help reassure allies about the strength of the military coalition – and to deter potential aggressors, like Russia.
NATO has a relatively small annual budget of around US$3.6 billion. The U.S. and Germany are the largest contributors to this budget, each responsible for funding 16% of NATO's costs each year.
Separate from NATO's annual budget, in 2014, NATO members agreed that each participating country should spend the equivalent of 2% of its gross domestic product on their own national defense. Twenty two of NATO's 31 members with military forces were expected that 2% threshold as of April 2025.
Although NATO is chiefly a military alliance, it has roots in the mutual economic interests of both the U.S. and Europe.
Europe is the United States' most important economic partner. Roughly one-quarter of all U.S. trade is with Europe – more than the U.S. has with Canada, China or Mexico.
Over 2.3 million American jobs are directly tied to producing exports that reach European countries that are part of NATO.
NATO helps safeguard this mutual economic relationship between the U.S. and Europe. If Russia or another country tries to intimidate, dominate or even invade a European country, this could hurt the American economy. In this way, NATO can be seen as the insurance policy that underwrites the strength and vitality of the American economy.
The heart of that insurance policy is Article 5, a mutual defense pledge that member countries agree to when they join NATO.
Article 5 says that an armed attack against one NATO member is considered an attack against the entire alliance. If one NATO member is attacked, all other NATO members must help defend the country in question. NATO members have only invoked Article 5 once, following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S., when the alliance deployed aircraft to monitor U.S. skies.
A wavering commitment to Article 5
Trump has questioned whether he would enforce Article 5 and help defend a NATO country if it is not paying the required 2% of its gross domestic product.
NBC News also reported in April 2025 that the U.S. is likely going to cut 10,000 or more of the nearly 85,000 American troops stationed in Europe. The U.S. might also relinquish its top military leadership position within NATO, according to NBC.
Many political analysts expect the U.S. to shift its national security focus away from Europe and toward threats posed by China – specifically, the threat of China invading or attacking Taiwan.
At the same time, the Trump administration appears eager to reset relations with Russia. This is despite the Russian military's atrocities committed against Ukrainian military forces and civilians in the war Russia began in 2022, and Russia's intensifying hybrid war against Europeans in the form of covert spy attacks across Europe. This hybrid warfare allegedly includesRussia conducting cyberattacks and sabotage operations across Europe. It also involves Russia allegedly trying to plant incendiary devices on planes headed to North America, among other things.
A shifting role in Europe
The available evidence indicates that the U.S. is backing away from its role in Europe. At best – from a European security perspective – the U.S. could still defend European allies with the potential threat of its nuclear weapon arsenal. The U.S. has significantly more nuclear weapons than any Western European country, but it is not clear that this is enough to deter Russia without the clear presence of large numbers of American troops in Europe, especially given that Moscow continues to perceive the U.S. as NATO's most important and most powerful member.
For this reason, significantly downsizing the number of U.S. troops in Europe, giving up key American military leadership positions in NATO, or backing away from the alliance in other ways appears exceptionally perilous. Such actions could increase Russian aggression across Europe, ultimately threatening not just European security but America's as well.
Maintaining America's leadership position in NATO and sustaining its troop levels in Europe helps reinforce the U.S. commitment to defending its most important allies. This is the best way to protect vital U.S. economic interests in Europe today and ensure Washington will have friends to call on in the future.
John Deni is Research Professor of Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental, and Multinational Security Studies, U.S. Army War College.
The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.
External Link
https://theconversation.com/europeans-are-concerned-that-the-us-will-withdraw-support-from-nato-they-are-right-to-worry-americans-should-too-253907
© The Conversation
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Diplomat
11 minutes ago
- The Diplomat
Fiji's Patriarchal Bargain
The patriarchal bargain shaping Fijian society has often played out as a man seizing power by force, followed by voters legitimizing him at the ballot box. In April, Fiji was left reeling after a violent weekend of domestic violence claimed the lives of three women, leaving six children motherless. Condemnation was swift from women's crisis service providers and activists, the public service, faith-based organizations, and the government. A 19 percent rise in crimes against women in 2025, compared to the same period a year ago, has emerged amid overlapping crises: an HIV outbreak, a public appointment debacle foregrounding a pending Supreme Court ruling on the 2013 Constitution, a floundering health sector, an education crisis, and a bungled public transport card rollout. A 2024 study found that 71.6 percent of Fijian women respondents had experienced domestic violence. Less prominent in the discourse is violence against gender minorities, particularly transgender people and sex workers, which has also claimed lives. A 2019 study on the socioeconomic conditions and human rights of bisexual, transgender, and gender-nonconfirming people in Fiji found that 83.6 percent had experienced physical violence from an intimate partner. In 1988, Deniz Kandiyoti coined the term 'patriarchal bargain,' to describe how women sacrifice their dignity, opportunity and self-determination to secure survival under male domination. As a society, Fiji too has made trade-offs to survive violence — violence publicly spearheaded, at least, by militarily backed male figures. Such a pattern has made Fiji a Pacific outlier in the Asia-Pacific's history of coups. With Donald Trump's rise revealing America's social pathologies, and Sitiveni Rabuka's return as Fiji's Trump-admiring coup leader turned two-time prime minister, contexts may differ and nuances abound, but parallels persist. As citizens brace for another round of election year posturing, the question is whether Fiji can reckon with patriarchal traditions and cultural norms underpinning its violent present. Researchers argue that Pacific countries like Fiji face a decolonization question when confronting the place of domestic violence within their cultures. Fijians can easily point to prominent figures in the public service, corporate world, and government who are known, publicly documented perpetrators of violence and misogyny. Lasting solutions require an honest examination of the violence woven into Fijian culture, tradition, and faith. The patriarchal promise is that a woman is safe if she conforms to prevailing conservative norms, and maintains an agreeable, non-threatening likeability. Yet Fijians know that good behavior, age, marital status, chiefly status, or professional prestige have never guaranteed women's safety from public ridicule, professional insubordination, character assassination, and cyberbullying. Such violations are accepted as par for the course in navigating Fiji's public life. Calls from the prime minister and senior civil servants to respect women ring hollow when only two women lead ministries, just one in three permanent secretaries are women, not a single woman serves as an ambassador, and an opportunity to appoint Fiji's first female president was passed over. Thus, Fiji's patriarchal system deploys the rhetoric of women's gendered suffering while opposing their freedom in practice. As tired as the cliche may be, sexism partly survives through women's participation in it. Internalized patriarchy is a feature rather than a bug of the system. Even the most prominent of Fijian women's gendered expressions of humility, maternalism, self-sacrifice, and non-confrontational camaraderie with male counterparts may be well-meaning, but also exemplify safety-seeking within patriarchy. Fijian women in public life are not immune to sexism, regressive policy positions, or poor leadership. Yet while such flaws are used to dismiss women's suitability for public office, men can lead coups, justify raising their own salaries while public services crumble, lead erratically and unilaterally, flout transparency, and still be upheld as statesmen. The patriarchal bargain shaping Fijian society has often played out as a man seizing power by force, followed by voters legitimizing him at the ballot box, hoping perhaps to reclaim agency by surrendering it in exchange for peace and safety. Yet, neither peace nor safety has arrived, as the violence in April made clear. Concerted efforts are more needed than ever, as trends in Fiji's suicide statistics raise serious concerns for Indo-Fijians, particularly males and the elderly. Recorded factors include relationship and family problems, alongside questions about whether the history of coups targeting Indo-Fijians has left lasting psychological and socioeconomic impacts. Before the noise of an election year reaches its peak, it is worth considering whether Fijians have been getting the raw end of the patriarchal deal. There are encouraging developments with the truth and reconciliation process underway, and a military averse to interfering in politics. The country's steadfast civil society community, a diverse generation of young activists and academics, and a willingness among men to confront patriarchy are helping to challenge established norms. It is a particularly timely question as the country edges toward gerontocracy. Fiji's current prime minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, was in his early 40s and the youngest ever to assume the office in 1992. He now holds the record for being the oldest. If re-elected in 2026, Rabuka would extend that record yet again. In a country where life expectancy lags behind the global average, Fiji's political elites continue to grow older. Statements from within the prime minister's party reveal a culture that views leadership as a vehicle for personal career advancement rather than a public responsibility. Heavy on aspiration, missing in this narrative is citizens' well-being as a leadership goal. Such corporate-coded perspectives are increasingly outdated. Organizational psychology studies show that 'achievement strivers' in national leadership received poor ratings from historians on greatness, decision-making, and political skill, suggesting that strong principles as public servants, rather than mere hierarchical ambition, are what produce effective leadership. Fiji's gerontocratic drift is reinforced by male-oriented editorial choices in opinion writing. Political sensemaking in traditional media is dominated by older males as sources, subjects and authors, filling opinion pages with fawning features and self-penned vanity write-ups, and wrapping violent logic in gentlemanly rhetoric insisting the same hands that inflict political violence are capable of healing the nation. While women and vulnerable minorities experience the violent outcomes of Fiji's patriarchal bargain, everyone ultimately bears the cost. As observed of conservative women in the 1980s U.S., 'they hide their bruises of body and heart; they dress carefully and have good manners; they suffer; they love God; they follow the rules.' This resonates in Fijian society, where nine out of ten women do not report domestic violence, trapped in relationships by poverty, fear, and community pressure. If patriarchal mindsets persist in law enforcement, and women and the elderly are unsafe in their relationships, the interlocking challenges of domestic violence, suicide, drug abuse, and the HIV crisis have little chance of abating. In leaving the falsities of the bargain and their collective role in it unexamined, Fijians risk denying themselves the enduring safety they have long yearned for.
Japan Times
an hour ago
- Japan Times
BRICS fills soft-power vacuum as Trump-led U.S. retreats
With the U.S. withdrawing from international organizations and alienating other countries with tariffs, the 10-nation BRICS grouping of major emerging economies has been gradually stepping in to fill a growing soft-power vacuum, particularly among Global South countries. Highlighting this approach was the group's two-day summit that ended Monday in Rio de Janeiro, where member states took a firm stance on topics such as strengthening multilateralism, establishing international artificial intelligence standards and tackling climate change as the BRICS aims to become a credible alternative to the established international order. 'This year's summit — particularly its efforts to align positions on artificial intelligence, health care and climate change — indicates that BRICS is evolving into a credible voice for the Global South, capable of setting new standards and norms,' said Sebastian Maslow, an associate professor at the University of Tokyo. Maslow laid out a laundry list of areas where the U.S., under President Donald Trump, appears to be retreating. From withdrawing from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Paris climate agreement and undermining the World Trade Organization to engaging in unilateral military action against Iran and scaling back international aid, BRICS' emphasis on multilateral cooperation and development can be viewed as 'an attempt to fill the global governance vacuum' created by the Trump administration. 'As the U.S. grows increasingly unpredictable due to its 'America First' trade posture, BRICS has positioned itself as a defender of the international trade order, emphasizing rules and norms,' he added. Yet the grouping, which represents about 40% of global economic output, also faces several issues, the greatest of which is arguably cohesion. BRICS heterogeneous nature makes it increasingly difficult for members to align their agendas across the board and therefore fully compete with — or complement — the U.S.-led Group of Seven. The original bloc comprised Brazil, Russia, China and India. It later included South Africa, and last year added five new members — Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Indonesia and the United Arab Emirates — with 10 others becoming partner nations. While the BRICS' expansion has given it boosted diplomatic and economic heft, it also means that its members, some of which are regional rivals, are increasingly divided over what the grouping's primary role should be. For instance, it's still unclear whether it is mainly a multilateral organization focused on boosting development, a geopolitical instrument aimed at countering Western — particularly G7 — dominance, or a platform to overcome international isolation, as is notably the case with Russia. 'While the expansion increases the group's geographic footprint and share of the world's economy and population, it also underscores growing internal contradictions by bringing together democracies and autocracies with varying global ambitions,' said Mario Braga, Latin America analyst at U.S.-based geopolitics and intelligence firm RANE. This, Braga added, 'will make it increasingly hard to reach consensus over the coming years.' Trump sought to capitalize on these divisions by threatening on Sunday an additional 10% tariffs on any country that supports what he described as the BRICS' 'anti-American' policies. Trump didn't provide any explanation, but he had previously warned the bloc not to create a new currency or take steps to replace the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency. For now, Trump's stance appears to have been effective. 'At the BRICS summit, the group adopted a more cautious stance, driven by concerns over possible retaliatory measures from Washington,' said Eurasia Group expert Julia Thomson. BRICS nations are looking to fill a soft-power vacuum as the U.S., under President Donald Trump, appears to be retreating from the global stage. | BLOOMBERG 'The final communique was notably broad and avoided contentious subjects, such as U.S. trade policy or BRICS initiatives that might diminish the dominance of the dollar, including the promotion of trade with local currency,' she added. Nevertheless, the differences among member states haven't prevented leaders from gathering or carving out areas of alignment, including on climate change, health care and development aid, AI and global governance — collective efforts that continue to gain momentum among emerging economies. On climate change, BRICS leaders formally endorsed at the summit the Tropical Forests Forever Facility mechanism Brazil had proposed at the United Nations COP28 climate summit in 2023. The TFFF framework aims to attract public and private investment to support forest preservation via a $125 billion endowment, RANE's Braga said, with China already signaling its willingness to invest. China is key in this regard as it has become the world's leading producer of renewable energy and the largest producer of solar panels and wind turbines. Meanwhile, Brazil, which will be hosting the COP30 in November, is third globally in terms of installed renewable energy capacity, with 88% of its energy mix coming from renewable sources. Arguably the most important factor for Global South countries is economic development, an area where the BRICS has pushed hard to promote its soft power by financing infrastructure and sustainable development projects through the group's New Development Bank (NDB). 'South-to-south collaboration in trade and investment continues to grow,' said Warwick Powell, an adjunct professor at the Queensland University of Technology. 'The NDB has increased its financing of development and infrastructure projects and will continue to do so.' China, for its part, has made direct contributions to economic development via its Belt and Road initiative. Meanwhile, the summit also saw the BRICS, which now represent more than half the world's population, aim to assume global leadership in eliminating what are called socially determined diseases, which are broadly defined as illnesses that "are closely linked to poverty, inequality, and inadequate living conditions." In addition to promoting the research and development of innovative health approaches, BRICS leaders also recalled the central role in fostering multilateral and regional cooperation of the WHO — an organization the U.S. has withdrawn from twice under Trump. Another area where BRICS nations are targeting a global role is in regulating nonmilitary AI. Leaders of the grouping are calling for international frameworks to avoid regulatory fragmentation — a move that could help avoid having individual states following their own set of rules. Chinese Premier Li Qiang attends the BRICS summit in Rio de Janeiro on Sunday. | AFP-JIJI 'Global South nations see AI as something that must be developed and governed in an inclusive manner,' Powell said, adding that this stands in contrast to the more zero-sum approach so far articulated by the Trump administration. On the issue of multilateralism, BRICS has long pushed to reform global institutions such as the U.N. Security Council and the International Monetary fund to reflect what it views as the realities of multipolarity and the growing clout of emerging economies. Yet experts such as Braga say that while there is indeed a gradual but growing shift in the global balance of power, the G7 will likely retain its status and decision-making power given its economic muscle and influence over global institutions. If BRICS aspires to become a credible player in global governance, it must first 'institutionalize cooperation' in areas such as health care, climate action and humanitarian aid, Maslow said. 'Cooperation in these domains should develop a tangible presence similar to that achieved by development financing through the NDB,' he said. Additionally, Maslow noted, BRICS members should temper anti-Western sentiments and its push to challenge the U.S. dollar. 'Such actions risk deepening internal divides,' he said. 'Countries like Brazil and India are unwilling to jeopardize their relationships with G7 members.'
The Mainichi
an hour ago
- The Mainichi
Tokyo stocks edge up after Trump says to impose 25% tariff on Japan
TOKYO (Kyodo) -- Tokyo stocks were slightly higher Tuesday morning, supported by hopes for progress in tariff talks between Japan and the United States after U.S. President Donald Trump left open the possibility despite announcing Washington will impose a 25 percent tariff on imports from Japan from next month. The 225-issue Nikkei Stock Average rose 123.61 points, or 0.31 percent, from Monday to 39,711.29. The broader Topix index was up 3.85 points, or 0.14 percent, at 2,815.57. The U.S. dollar climbed to the lower 146 yen range in Tokyo on yen selling as the U.S. announcement eased expectations of an early interest rate hike by the Bank of Japan, dealers said. At noon, the dollar fetched 146.09-10 yen compared with 146.02-12 yen in New York and 145.19-20 yen in Tokyo at 5 p.m. Monday. The euro was quoted at $1.1737-1740 and 171.47-52 yen against $1.1703-1713 and 170.94-171.04 yen in New York and $1.1744-1745 and 170.52-56 yen in Tokyo late Monday afternoon. The Nikkei stock index remained in the positive territory as sentiment was not significantly dampened after Trump said Monday that a 25 percent tariff on imports from Japan and South Korea will be imposed from Aug. 1. The market was lifted as export-oriented auto and electronic issues were bought on a weaker yen, which increases exporters' overseas profits when repatriated.
