Four Futures for NATO

The NATO bloc has been quaking for some years already. U.S. President Donald Trump, by his account, bade ‘bye, bye’ to allies after Denmark’s refusal to hand over Greenland to the United States. He called NATO a ‘paper tiger’ when allies did not side with the USA against Iran, triggering President Emmanuel Macron of France to accuse Trump of ‘hollowing out’ the Alliance. And then the Pentagon floated the idea of excluding Spain from NATO and only supporting ‘model allies’ that deliver on defense spending. And that is not all.

Anna Wieslander, chair of the board of the Institute for Security and Development Policy and director for Northern Europe at the Atlantic Council, undertook to examine the question of the bloc’s future in detail. Her analysis let her identify four potential courses of events.

Future No. 1: More Europe in NATO – the moderate version

The idea of a European pillar in NATO is by no means new. It was born more than sixty years ago – launched by the Kennedy administration.

As traditionally conceived, a European pillar in NATO is not about replacing American leadership but rather about a more united Europe shouldering a more equal part of the burden within NATO. In other words, it has been about burden-sharing rather than burden-shifting.

In the moderate version of a future with more Europe in NATO, the Alliance will remain U.S.-led but European allies will shoulder greater responsibility and deliver up to two-thirds of NATO’s combined operational capacity for collective defense measured in rapidly usable forces, enablers, and other capabilities to execute advance plans across NATO territory.

Future No. 2: More Europe in NATO – the brutal version

This is the future where gradual burden-shifting to Europe is the main trend but with a real risk of becoming burden-dumping by America if not managed appropriately. The difference from the moderate version is rather the pace of those efforts, the lack of coordination across the Atlantic, and the future role of the United States in the Alliance.

This brutal and chaotic future is the most likely scenario in the coming years, as it aligns with the rapid burden-shifting pushed by the Trump administration under its NATO 3.0 vision.

Future No. 3: NATO narrows to Europe and Canada

In this future, the United States decides to leave NATO, formally or informally. Dating back to his first term, Trump has repeatedly stated that he may pull the USA out of the Alliance – to the extent that the U.S. Congress passed a law in 2023 to prevent the president from doing so without the legislators’ approval, creating a cushion but not a full brake against such an initiative by the president.

If the United States were to leave NATO, allies would need to fill the major void of Washington’s extended nuclear deterrence. Europe and Canada would need to increase nuclear deterrence. This would be difficult, risky and very, very costly.

Future No. 4: NATO becomes part of the European Union

In this future, the European Union becomes the alliance around which the defense of Europe is organized and NATO is dismantled. Such a development would be triggered by an American withdrawal from NATO – either formal or informal – and European leaders calculating, in contrast to the previous scenario, that they do not consider NATO worth preserving.

In this scenario, allies that are not members of the EU—such as the UK, Canada, Norway, Iceland, and Turkey—could be invited to enter the new defense structure.

The EU has deliberately avoided duplicating NATO when it comes to e.g. command, control and communication procedures such as the defense-planning process and standards for interoperability. That means these components would have to be built from scratch—a costly and time-consuming endeavor.

The four futures for NATO sketched above reflect how poised for transformation – and a shift of responsibility for the future of the European security system – the transatlantic relationship is.

Even though the most likely future is that NATO prevails with the United States remaining in the Alliance and its European allies assuming more responsibility within it, it is clear that the road going forward will be bumpy. Quite obviously, Europe’s burden of responsibility for the NATO bloc, both financial and organizational, will only increase. The most perilous consequence of these processes is the loss (if temporary) of cohesion and stability by the Alliance, and the weakening of its defensive deterrence in the historic period when these are important as never before.

Original publication: https://www.isdp.eu/publication/four-futures-for-nato/