Europe’s major military powers are formulating plans to assume greater responsibility for the continent’s defense, reducing reliance on the United States.
According to a report in the Financial Times (FT), these discussions are driven by fears of a unilateral US withdrawal from NATO, exacerbated by repeated threats from former President Donald Trump to weaken or abandon the transatlantic alliance. The aim is to avoid the chaos that such a withdrawal could cause.
Four European officials familiar with the matter indicated that Germany, the United Kingdom, France, and the Scandinavian countries are among those engaged in these informal discussions.
The FT reports that their objective is to devise a plan that shifts the financial and military burden towards European capitals. The intention is to present this plan to the US before NATO’s annual leaders’ summit in The Hague in June.
The proposal would include firm commitments from Europe to increase defense spending and enhance military capabilities, with the goal of persuading Trump to accept a gradual handover that would allow the US to focus more on Asia.
Since Trump’s election, countries such as Germany, France, and the UK have moved to increase defense spending or accelerate already planned increases. The EU has also launched initiatives to boost military investments among its member states.
Officials estimate that it would take approximately 5 to 10 years of increased spending to elevate Europe’s capabilities to a level where they could replace most US competencies, excluding US nuclear deterrence.
One source stated, “Increasing spending is our only leverage: burden-sharing and moving away from dependence on the US. We are beginning these discussions, but the task is so enormous that many are overwhelmed by its magnitude.”
While US diplomats have assured their European counterparts that Trump will remain committed to NATO membership and Article 5’s mutual defense clause, many European capitals worry that the White House might rapidly reduce troop or equipment deployments or withdraw from NATO’s joint missions.
Officials noted that some capitals are hesitant to participate in burden-sharing talks, fearing it might encourage the US to act more quickly, while others believe that despite Trump’s rhetoric, he does not intend to make significant changes to the US presence in Europe.
Others are skeptical that the Trump administration, given its unpredictable nature, would even agree to a structured process.
One official questioned, “You need an agreement with the Americans, and it’s not clear whether they will be willing to do that. Can you even trust that they would stick to an agreement?”
Officials highlight ongoing and regular discussions, led by France and Britain, about establishing a “coalition of the willing” to support Ukraine in its war against Russia and to invest in European defense.
These discussions among more than ten European defense powers do not include the US.
When asked what a European pillar within NATO would mean and whether it is feasible, a senior Western official responded, “We are seeing it now: the UK and France are taking the initiative [on a guarantee force for Ukraine] without the Americans.”
NATO officials argue that maintaining the alliance with less or no US involvement is much simpler than creating a new structure, given the difficulty of recreating or renegotiating the existing military plans, capability targets, rules, command structure, and Article 5 for the continent’s defense.
Officials stated that for Europe’s core defense, the UK and other Atlantic maritime powers, the Scandinavian countries for the north of the continent, and Türkiye for the southeast defense will always be needed.
Marion Messmer, a research fellow in international security at Chatham House, noted, “Even without the US, NATO provides a structure for security cooperation in Europe. There are aspects that would need to be replaced if the US were to leave. But it provides a framework and infrastructure that Europeans are really familiar with. It does so much of the work that you would have to do from scratch if you were just setting up a different type of structure for just European members.”
