It is time for Europe to finally take its own defense seriously.<\/p>\n
At a rally in South Carolina on February 10, former United States President Donald Trump shocked many as he recalled a discussion he had with a European NATO ally when he was president. In response to a question about whether the U.S. would come to a country\u2019s aid even if it had not spent the NATO target commitment of 2 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defense,\u00a0he told the crowd<\/a>: \u201cI said, \u2018You didn\u2019t pay, you\u2019re delinquent? No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage [Russia] to do whatever the hell they want.\u2019 \u201d<\/p>\n This statement elicited strong reactions, especially in Europe, where many\u00a0NATO<\/a>\u00a0countries still do not spend 2 percent of GDP on defense. Some have also claimed that the statements undermine NATO\u2019s principle of solidarity.<\/p>\n Although Mr. Trump used his customary aggressive tone, and the suggestion that a U.S. president would invite Russia to attack an ally is grotesque, the essence of his message has merit. After nearly 80 years of peace due to U.S. protection, European countries should be able to shoulder responsibility for their security.<\/p>\n Europe is in a tough spot. The war in\u00a0Ukraine<\/a>\u00a0has turned into a war of attrition. Kyiv is fully dependent on support from the West, especially Washington. Ukraine-fatigue is setting in with the American populace, and not only among Republicans. The Biden administration will not be able to indefinitely sustain support for Ukraine.<\/p>\n Unfortunately, it is increasingly likely that a cease-fire compromise will be reached, resulting in territorial gains for Russia. This might encourage the Kremlin to continue its policy of reconstituting the old Soviet Union borders and neutralizing Central Europe. Hanno Pevkur, the Estonian minister of defense, recently\u00a0said<\/a>\u00a0that a Russian attack on his country could be a realistic scenario in three or four years. Similar concerns exist in the other Baltic states.<\/p>\n Regardless of American politics, Europe\u2019s sovereignty in defense will be crucial, not just when it comes to its relationship with Russia. France has been a leader in this regard since General Charles de Gaulle was at the helm in the 1960s.<\/p>\n In this spirit, President Emmanuel Macron made a statement in a 2019\u00a0interview with The Economist<\/a>\u00a0that was heavily criticized \u2013 just as Mr. Trump\u2019s was: \u201cWhat we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO,\u201d he said, adding that Europe was on \u201cthe edge of a precipice\u201d and needed to start thinking of itself strategically as a geopolitical power. Without such thinking, Europe would \u201cno longer be in control of [its] destiny.\u201d While this made sense at the time, Russia\u2019s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has led to a reinvigoration of NATO.<\/p>\n Given the possibility of a new Trump presidency, Europe\u2019s political establishment is worried, particularly regarding issues of trade, Ukraine and defense. These concerns are justified \u2013 but not because Mr. Trump could end up back in the White House. Politics in Washington depends on a wide array of factors, most of which the president has little to no influence upon. U.S. politics simply may not always go Europe\u2019s way.<\/p>\n Yet instead of coming up with realistic ways to increase military readiness in three aspects \u2013 willingness to defend, sufficient trained soldiers and effective weapons \u2013 Europe\u2019s leaders are dithering, lamenting the possibility of Mr. Trump becoming president again.<\/p>\n Europe needs to achieve military sovereignty. Recently, some prominent politicians have begun discussing whether the\u00a0European Union<\/a>\u00a0should build its own nuclear deterrent. Doing so makes little sense given the risk scenario. Responsible actors will only escalate if the threat from an aggressor is existential. Conflicts in Central Europe will not suffice to trigger this escalation.<\/p>\n Furthermore, a nuclear deterrent does nothing to address some of Europe\u2019s other security challenges, including those beyond its southern borders, in Africa and the Middle East. Houthi attacks on ships traveling through the Red Sea, for example, present a clear economic threat that nuclear weapons cannot solve. Russia cannot be the sole focus of Europe\u2019s military rebuild.<\/p>\n Nor will it help to whine about former President Trump\u2019s words potentially splitting NATO. Instead, his harangue could benefit Europe, serving as a wake-up call to countries that until now have been snuggling comfortably under the U.S. security blanket.<\/p>\n There are already signs that some European countries are opening their eyes. France, Germany and Poland are\u00a0revitalizing the Weimar Triangle<\/a>\u00a0alliance format, where discussions will hopefully include defense issues. But whatever happens, reinvigorating Europe\u2019s defense capabilities will require close cooperation with the United Kingdom.<\/p>\nAmerica might not always be there<\/h2>\n
Eyes wide open<\/h2>\n