The United States has traditionally been a pivotal leader within NATO, an alliance deemed the most successful military coalition in history.
Founded in 1949 by the U.S. and 11 other nations in North America and Europe, NATO has since expanded to 32 member countries.
Today, however, European leaders express growing anxieties over the reliability of the U.S. as an ally, presenting significant challenges for Europe and NATO as a whole.
These fears stem from recent actions and statements from U.S. political leaders, notably former President Donald Trump.
Trump’s controversial remarks included aspirations concerning Greenland—an autonomous territory of Denmark, a NATO member—as well as calls for Canada to become the “51st state.”
He has also shown a preference for Russia during discussions at the United Nations and criticized the European Union, alluding to its aim to disadvantage the U.S.
Despite this, Trump’s administration maintained that the U.S. commitment to NATO remained strong, a sentiment echoed by other senior officials.
Historically, both liberal and conservative U.S. politicians have understood the importance of NATO in bolstering American military and economic interests.
The foundation of NATO lay in the desire for peace and stability in Europe after World War II, significantly aimed at countering the Soviet threat that persisted until the empire’s dissolution in 1991.
With headquarters in Brussels employing around 2,000 individuals, NATO lacks its own military force, relying instead on member states to contribute troops for operations under NATO’s command.
Operational strategies are designed and executed by a military command structure led by an American officer, reinforcing U.S. leadership.
During peacetime, NATO conducts various training exercises across Eastern Europe—a measure intended to reassure allies of the coalition’s military strength and deter potential aggressors like Russia.
Financially, NATO operates with an annual budget of approximately $3.6 billion, with both the U.S. and Germany covering 16% of costs each year.
In 2014, NATO allies committed to spending 2% of their gross domestic product on national defense, a target that 22 of the 31 nations with military capabilities aimed to meet by April 2025.
Although primarily a military coalition, NATO’s origins are closely tied to the mutual economic interests of the U.S. and Europe.
Europe represents the U.S.’s most significant economic partner, accounting for about one-quarter of American trade, surpassing that with Canada, China, or Mexico.
Moreover, approximately 2.3 million American jobs are linked directly to exports reaching NATO member countries in Europe.
NATO essentially safeguards this crucial economic relationship, as any aggressive actions by Russia against European nations could negatively affect the U.S. economy.
In essence, NATO serves as an insurance policy for the vitality of the American economy.
At the core of this insurance policy is Article 5, which stipulates that an armed attack on one member is deemed an attack on all.
Article 5 has been invoked only once, following the September 11 attacks in 2001, when member nations provided military support to the U.S.
Controversially, Trump has questioned his commitment to this mutual defense clause, raising concerns about the level of support the U.S. would provide to NATO countries not meeting the 2% GDP spending guideline.
Reports from April 2025 suggest the potential for the U.S. to withdraw 10,000 or more of its nearly 85,000 stationed troops in Europe.
There is also speculation regarding the relinquishment of U.S. leadership roles within NATO, a shift anticipated by many analysts amidst rising focus on threats posed by China, particularly related to Taiwan.
Concurrently, the Trump administration seemed inclined to pursue a reset in relations with Russia, despite the latter’s military involvement in the conflict with Ukraine and its ongoing hybrid warfare tactics in Europe—comprising cyberattacks and espionage.
This perceived withdrawal of U.S. commitment poses risks not only for Europe but also for American security interests.
While the U.S. maintains a formidable nuclear arsenal, there are uncertainties about whether this capability alone can effectively deter Russian aggression in the absence of a robust presence of American troops in Europe.
Significantly downsizing U.S. troop levels, ceding military command in NATO, or adopting a more isolationist approach could escalate Russian threats across Europe and ultimately jeopardize not only European security but also America’s national interests.
To preserve its leadership status in NATO and maintain troop levels in Europe, the U.S. must reaffirm its commitment to its allies, thereby securing vital economic interests and ensuring stable diplomatic relationships in the years to come.
image source from：https://theconversation.com/europeans-are-concerned-that-the-us-will-withdraw-support-from-nato-they-are-right-to-worry-americans-should-too-253907
