The former US president suggested he might not protect an ally in the event of a Russian attack. In Europe, these comments are a reminder of the likelihood of a decline in American support in the years to come.
The statement “undermines all of our security”, in the opinion of NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. During an election rally, Donald Trump recounted, on Saturday February 10, a discussion he had with the leader of a member state of the Atlantic Alliance. “One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’Told Lhe Republican candidate for the American presidential election. The person concerned would have replied: “No, I won’t protect you. In fact, I will encourage them to do what they want. You have to pay your bills.”
These words are not a surprise, coming from a man already convinced in 2000 (in his book America We Deserve) that “their conflicts [en Europe de l’Est] are not worth American lives.” The words of the former president nevertheless shocked. In Europe, they serve as a reminder of the probability of a decline in American support in the face of the Russian threat. Lhe subject promises to be at the heart of the debates at the 60th Munich Security Conference, which opens this Friday, February 16 in the German city.
A “crucial” American deterrent force
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the return of war to Europe, warnings have increased about Moscow’s warlike intentions. “Vladimir Putin could attack a NATO member country one day”, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius warned again in January. A scenario “possible” from here “five to eight years”, according to him. The chairman of the NATO military committee, the Dutchman Rob Bauer, also agrees that“we must prepare for a war with Russia”. But how can such a conflict be waged without the American ally?
On its website, NATO declares that it “depends on the United States to obtain certain essential capabilities”, particularly in matters of intelligence or anti-ballistic missile defense. Washington thus finances 16% of the budgets (civil and military) and the investment program for the security of the Alliance, the highest contribution with Germany.
The American government devotes nearly 3.5% of its gross domestic product (GDP) to its defense, according to a press release. (PDF) of NATO dating from the summer of 2023. Only Poland does better, allocating 3.9% of its GDP to the sector. Within the Atlantic Alliance, the rule is to dedicate at least 2% of GDP to military spending. Eighteen countries out of 31 (including France) will cross this threshold this year, according to Jens Stoltenberg, compared to only 11 in 2023. Last year, the American defense budget represented 67.5% of all military spending of NATO countries, according to the organization.
Beyond budgets, American defense is “absolutely crucial” for Europe “in matters of deterrence”, analyzes Gesine Weber, researcher at the German Marshall Fund of the United States think tank. Washington has more than 5,000 nuclear warheads (a little less than Moscow), compared to 290 for Paris or 225 for London, according to the Federation of American Scientists. A guarantee of protection for Europe, while article 5 of the NATO treaty provides mutual assistance in the event of an attack.
“The United States has a massive nuclear arsenal to deter Russia. It’s the same thing on the conventional level (…) We know that the response will be massive and destructive.”
Gesine Weber, specialist in European security and defenseat franceinfo
Over the coming years, this American confidence could crumble, especially in the event of Donald Trump’s re-election on November 5. A new Biden administration would be more reassuring, but the priority for the coming years is “is given to China”, recalls Gesine Weber.
In its national security strategy (PDF)in October 2022, the White House writes that Russia represents a “immediate threat”, as evidenced by its assault in Ukraine. China, “on the other hand”, is seen as the only “competitor” intending to “reshape the world order”and growing capabilities to do so. “Joe Biden is deeply transatlantic, but we see in the long term that Europe is not the priority of the United States, develops Gesine Weber. This is an uncomfortable truth for many Europeans.”
What European capabilities today?
According to researchers interviewed by franceinfo, European countries may have waited too long to see this American decline taking shape. Added to this are divisions between EU member states on the Russian threat, American aid and European defense. The eastern flank of the continent, the most vulnerable to pressure from Moscow, sees American support as vital, irreplaceable aid. Other countries, such as France, are instead calling for building a strong European defense, capable of responding to threats alone.
But can Europe really do it? In the broad sense (including the United Kingdom and Turkey), it has nearly 2 million active force members, as well as 1.7 million reservists, noted Tuesday the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Moscow, for its part, can deploy 1.1 million active military personnel and 1.5 million reservists. Last year, Europeans increased their defense budgets. European military spending reached some 360 billion euros in 2023, against 843 billion for the United States. Russia spent 93 billion euros (5.8% of its GDP) in 2023, but plans to increase its effort to 129 billion euros in 2024, or 7.5% of its GDP.
If the defense budgets of the Twenty-Seven “are not negligible”, “the European defense market suffers from its fragmentation”, tempers the Jacques-Delors Institute. According to the think tank, EU member states have 17 different types of tanks, 20 models of fighter planes, 29 types of destroyers or frigates… A heterogeneous and expensive arsenal, which poses a brake on the development of European production. Countries also obtain supplies from foreign partners such as the United States. “There are a lot of European capacities which are not organized (…) We are increasing them all a little”, confirms Tara Varma, guest researcher at the American think tank Brookings Institution.
“The European Union is economic, monetary, political… It was not supposed to think about military strategy. These responsibilities were devolved to NATO.”
Tara Varma, visiting scholar at the Brookings Institutionat franceinfo
In the past, attempts to develop European defense have encountered reluctance, from Washington or internally. Today, if Europe found itself left to its own devices, it would need “more than ten years to acquire the potential of the American conventional military arsenal”writes Nicolas Tenzer, specialist in international relations, on the website of the Center for the Analysis of European Policies.
Europe has significant personnel, quality equipment and nuclear weapons, “but we have to look at the dynamics”, warns Pierre Haroche, lecturer in international security at Queen Mary University of London (United Kingdom). Russia, stuck in a war economy, “is capable of holding out a long war”, while the Twenty-Seven lack at this stage a defense industry in working order. In other words, Europe might be able to stop an assault immediately, less a conflict that gets bogged down. “Ultimately, it becomes an industrial matter, continues Pierre Haroche. It’s about having an arms production capacity equivalent to that of Russia.”
“Spend together and speak with one voice”
In recent years, the European Union has stepped up its efforts to support kyiv and at the same time strengthen its defense. The European Council approved a “strategic compass” a few weeks after the start of the war in Ukraine, in order to “strengthening the EU’s security and defense policy by 2030”. The system called the “European Peace Facility” reimburses member states for military equipment sent to kyiv. The Commission announced in March 2023 the delivery of one million munitions to Ukraine in one year. Only half will be delivered on time, according to the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrell. Production capacities are increasing within the EU – by 20 to 30% in less than a year – but 40% of this production remains intended for export, declared the European Commissioner for the Internal Market, Thierry Breton, at the end november.
To go further and faster, Europe must move more towards a war economy, believes Pierre Haroche. A way to send a signal of strength and unity to Russia. For the security specialist, it is not enough for everyone to reach 2% of GDP dedicated to defense. “We must be able to spend together (…) speaking with one voice,” he insists. The response to the Covid-19 pandemic offers instructions: the Commission borrowed massively on the financial markets to finance the recovery, and the EU succeeded in pooling vaccine purchases.
“The challenge is pooling and economies of scale. It will be much more efficient to spend money collectively. (…) We then structure a defense industry, which knows that it has a long-term visibility.”
Pierre Haroche, specialist in security issues in Europeat franceinfo
The researcher believes that European countries could, for example, jointly purchase ammunition or drones. Estonia is also proposing joint loans of up to 100 billion euros to strengthen European defense. The European Peace Facility could be an instrument for joint arms spending, and the European Defense Agency could take care of the contracts, he continues. In terms of staffing, it will be necessary to strengthen recruitment and training of staff. NATO adopted a new force model in 2022 which provides for the deployment of 100,000 soldiers in ten days, a plan “ambitious” according to Pierre Haroche.
Such decisions will obviously be complex to make. “The European security order has been based for more than seventy-five years on the American security guarantee and NATO, notes Tara Varma. It’s not so simple to envisage a world and a security order without NATO, but Donald Trump is pushing us to do so.”