The Economist: Can Europe protect itself without the US?

The European continent is heading towards a dangerous crossroads, as the situation becomes increasingly tense due to the expansion of Russian military capabilities, the faltering Ukrainian response, and the increasing possibilities of Trump’s return to the White House.

This scenario raises fears of the gradual disintegration of the Atlantic alliance, in parallel with increasing US isolationist trends towards Washington abandoning its central role in NATO.

European countries and their forces are now wondering whether they will be able to confront this crisis without their long-standing ally for more than 80 years.

The question isn’t only about the United States leaving Ukraine, but about leaving Europe as a whole.

To fill the void left by the US withdrawal from Europe, the European continent will have to do more than just increase defense spending.

Europe will need to reassess its military power, the role of nuclear deterrence, and the far-reaching political ramifications for military organization and structuring, especially in the event that NATO disintegrates or the United States’ role as leader in the alliance is hollowed out.

These challenges weren’t new for Europe, as it embraced the French idea of strategic autonomy and dramatically increased defense spending after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014.

Increased defense spending in Europe won’t significantly enhance its fighting power, and it may have challenges in reaching its recruitment targets.

Even after increased spending after 2014, there has been no significant growth in military capabilities.

With the challenges of building military capabilities, Europe suffers from a shortage of manpower and resources to fight effectively and for a long period.

For this reason, major European countries are jostling over joint arms development projects, but facing challenges in distributing contracts and building up domestic defense industries.

These challenges are part of a broader challenge, in which building military capabilities and strengthening the arms industry includes fundamental economic, social and political changes.

If the US nuclear umbrella is absent, replacing it in Europe will be a major challenge.

Britain and France possess nuclear weapons, but US nuclear capabilities were considered the ultimate guarantee against a Russian war.

The disintegration of NATO is beginning to raise real concerns in Europe, as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen address security in a meeting aboard an F-16 fighter jet at a base in Denmark.

A recent study by French expert Bruno Tertrais indicates that the idea of ​​Britain and France participating in the decision to use nuclear weapons is no longer acceptable, which means that France won’t join the NATO nuclear planning group.

Nevertheless, Britain and France’s assurance that their weapons will protect allies could bolster confidence in European nuclear deterrence.

French statements regarding the importance of its vital interests and the proposal to establish a strategic dialogue with the allies show that the idea of ​​European deterrence enjoys support.

However, convincing adversaries and allies of the credibility of this commitment requires sustained diplomatic effort.

In terms of military leadership, the United States has left a major gap in European security with its withdrawal, making talk of creating a European military force in place of NATO likely.

However, Daniel Fiott of the Spanish Elcano Royal Institute think tank believes that focusing on strengthening European powers may not be enough, given their weak military infrastructure and the lack of participation of some EU member states such as Britain and Türkiye.

If NATO disintegrates, Europe assuming responsibility for its security alone is an alternative option.

Advocates of this option point to the importance of building a European pillar within NATO, which strengthens the alliance if the United States remains within it, confirms Europe’s commitment to common defense, and makes preparing for the disintegration of NATO a less difficult option in the future.

However, debate remains about the extent of European preparedness for the disintegration of NATO and its impact on continental security, which requires improving defense spending and the military capabilities of member states.

If NATO disintegrates, European presidents may have to direct their forces beyond the continent’s borders to meet new challenges, requiring effective political coordination and direction.

Ultimately, Europe must prepare for multiple scenarios of NATO disintegration, including negotiating a new architecture for European security and strengthening military cooperation within the continent, while maintaining political balance between member states and strengthening France’s role as a major influence in the EU.