President Trump recently reaffirmed America’s commitment to NATO’s Article 5, but it may be too little and too late for NATO allies who no longer view the United States as a stalwart security partner.
In his speech at the new NATO headquarters last month, Trump deliberately omitted an explicit reference to Article 5, choosing instead to berate allies about how the current burden-sharing agreement is “not fair to the people and taxpayers of the United States.” The speech, which fit neatly into his “American First” mantra, is unlikely to convince allies of America’s commitment to the alliance.
{mosads}One of the many reasons why NATO is the most successful military alliance in history is because the United States has always stood at its helm. While Trump may believe that he is asserting a new form of American leadership — he is alienating allies and forfeiting not only leadership of NATO, but that of the global stage as well.
Trump’s inaugural trip abroad centered around “America First” and what it means for America’s allies and adversaries alike. In an effort to make the new policies clearer and more palatable, national security adviser H.R. McMaster and chief economic adviser Gary D. Cohn wrote following the trip, “America First does not mean America alone,” adding that the Trump administration would “restore confidence in American leadership.”
On NATO, McMaster and Cohn acknowledged that “Alliances based on mutual respect and shared responsibility are strong. And strong alliances bolster American power.” They are absolutely correct, but they ignore the fact that Trump’s public disrespect of allies raises doubts about America’s role as a responsible ally. And that, as two advisers point out, will affect American power.
It is increasingly clear that America’s allies are preparing to pursue their collective interests without the United States, despite the fact that their efforts would be weakened without America’s military and economic power.
Reflecting on Trump’s visit to Europe, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said, “The times in which we can fully count on others are somewhat over.” Her statement demonstrates European doubt about whether or not the United States remains a credible ally, which could imperil the transatlantic relationship. As seen with the Paris climate agreement, European leaders are willing to move on without the United States when it comes to strategic imperatives, despite the fact that multilateralism without the United States is weaker.
Other traditional allies have also questioned the future of the United States’ role in the world. Canada’s Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland recently spoke about “the need for the rest of us to set our own clear and sovereign course” given the current state of U.S. global leadership.
Similarly, although Trump is not withdrawing from NATO, his damage to U.S. leadership and credibility within the alliance will likely propel the other allies to pursue security interests without the United States, mutually damaging to both sides of the Atlantic.
In terms of NATO security issues, like Ukraine, America’s allies could pursue a course of action without the United States, but it would be doomed to fail. Despite deploying thousands of troops as well as various transport vehicles and advanced weaponry to Eastern Europe, NATO’s actions are null without the U.S. security guarantee, which deters conventional military attacks from Russia. Absent a U.S. commitment to Article 5, countries like Estonia and Latvia are less secure. Similarly, a sanctions regime would be weaker without the world’s largest economy.
The United States will suffer if it is viewed as unreliable by its traditional allies and security partners. Article 5 was triggered for the first and only time after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. NATO subsequently aided U.S. efforts in Afghanistan, at one point having roughly 130,000 troops there supporting the United States.
Additionally, every NATO member is also in the Global Coalition to defeat ISIS and America’s European allies are at the forefront of efforts to stem the current migration crisis in the Mediterranean. NATO was also supportive of Trump’s airstrike on Syria and is a more realistic partner there than Russia — whose main interest is keeping Assad in power. Defeating ISIS and ending the conflict in Syria are top priorities for this new administration, but the United States cannot achieve its interests unilaterally.
Both sides of the Atlantic need to cooperate and support one another to achieve mutual interests. For effective cooperation to occur, the United States and Europe need to be able to rely on one another.
Trump’s speech at NATO came twelve days before the seventieth anniversary of Secretary of State George Marshall’s speech at Harvard University outlining his plans to rebuild war-torn Europe. Marshall’s speech reassured a weary continent and laid the roots for a strong transatlantic relationship.
Although the circumstances were vastly different, America’s European allies were looking for reassurance once again last month after months of mixed messages. Trump failed to deliver — instead creating greater uncertainty about NATO leadership and America’s status as a strong, reliable ally.
Corey Cooper is a Europe Fellow at Young Professionals in Foreign Policy. He is also a Research Associate in U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. Corey earned his BA in International Studies from American University. The views and opinions expressed in this piece are the author’s own.
The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the views of The Hill.