NATO's "radical steering" proposed by Trump is the core is to revise the "responsibility" that previously claimed to be "responsible" and amended the "responsibility transfer", which greatly reduced the US security role.This is the so -called concept of "dormant NATO", that is, the routine defense responsibilities are fully handed over to Europe, and the United States only plays the role of "quasi silence".
As the US election approaches, Republican candidates Trump's strong popularity has made EU countries generally worry about the future of NATO.In Trump's first term, the US -Europe relations have a serious difference in the sharing of defense costs.In 2018, Trump threatened many times to withdraw from NATO.In February this year, he publicly threatened to encourage Russia to attack NATO member states who did not pay enough defense bills.Recently, he issued a clear signal: Europe rather than the United States should bear the main responsibility of European defense.
All this means that once Trump comes to power, NATO is likely to have a "radical steering".What will this mean for Europe?
The North Atlantic Covenant Organization was established in April 1949, which was established in the Cold War Day. The first secretary -general, Esme, summarized the mission of the organization as "Keep the Russians Out, The Americanin, and the Germans DOWN) -The essence is that the United States is responsible for European defense, resisting the Soviet Union threats, and deterning Germany internally.There are two strategic consequences: First, stabilize Europe, promote European rejuvenation, and prevent politics from turning left; second, through the garrison Germany and the NATO, it fundamentally resolves the "German issue" and achieve permanent peace within Europe.
The little known is that in addition to resisting the Soviet Union's public goals, NATO also undertakes the even strong mission of US foreign policy -the political and economic order of rebuilding global capitalism.
European revival and prosperity are related to the National Security of the United States
The U.S. elite has realized before the end of World War II that the security of the United States will no longer be limited to the local area in the future, but to continuously expand the frontiers of global capitalism.At the beginning of the Cold War, the severe situation caused the United States to realize the rejuvenation and prosperity of Europe, which is related to US national security.From the perspective of U.S. policy makers, the goal of winning the Cold War and rebuilding the global economy is parallel, and the importance of the latter even exceeds the former.To this end, the United States has spared no effort to support Europe by the Cold War, helping its economic integration, and at the expense of paying the price of Europe to become the enemy of the United States in the future.Under the military asylum in the United States, Europe can calmly build a welfare country; in return, Europe voluntarily accepts the political leadership of the United States -this "transaction" has become a political foundation for unscrupulous relations after the war.
It can be said that the establishment of NATO has enabled the United States to rebuild the international relations within the world of capitalism, which has laid the foundation for the international order of post -war liberalism, and success is no less significant than winning the Cold War.
The Cold War ended in 1989.However, the Bush administration was not immersed in the illusion of Fushan's "historical end conclusion".From the critical 1990 to 1991, in the face of German unity, the dissolution of the Huayo, and the new world pattern of the Soviet Union, the U.S. decision makers re -evaluate the possible prospects of the "sequence of the world" based on the cold realist rationality.In their opinion, although the Soviet Union's threats no longer exist, the two new variables have caused the United States to worry: one is the possibility of Russia's revival on the ruins of the Soviet Union; the other is that Europe has attempted to establish an independent security mechanism as an alternative to NATO -the latterIt is particularly disturbed by the United States.Because of an independent Europe that weakens the existence of US politics and military, it may no longer obey the US orders.Indeed, Europe's pursuit of strategic autonomy -that is, the efforts of joint diplomatic and defense policies have not been interrupted since the 1970s.
Out of the strategic alert to Russia and Europe that may challenge the single -pole hegemony in the United States after the Cold War, the Bush administration secretly formulated pointers in the early 1992, which clearly pointed out that the primary goal of US foreign policy after the Cold War was to prevent the emergence of re -emergence.The new global power challenges the US leadership.For this purpose, the United States will never allow NATO to be weakened.
On the other hand, the post -war prosperity has made Europe grow into a superior economy, with a large market, so that it has sufficient conditions to move towards the self -sufficient "European Fortress".The United States is worried that once Europe is in the depression of economic depression, it will follow that politics will turn left and a larger market closure.This is bound to conflict with the globalization of economic globalization related to the major interests of the United States.The United States knows whether the third wave will be pushed by whether the authentic economic globalization that really affects the authenticity of goods around the world is important.The prosperity of Europe itself is not inseparable from the interdependence of the European and American economy -this can only be achieved by preserving NATO.Because only by maintaining a strong security alliance, can they have a political influence that curbs the "European Fortress".
Bush Singleism makes Europe and the United States reproduce cracks
In April 1992, the United States was thinking mature and decided to expand NATO east.The United States is in the chest of this bamboo -Europe ’s independent intervention in South Slav’ s civil war, the prospects of many countries to “Europe in Germany” are generally disturbed, and the former Huayo country ’s prevailing to the east of NATO -proves that NATO after the Cold War is still difficult to be replaced.Germany took the lead in reaching a tacit understanding. The United States supported the unified Germany to retain NATO to dispel doubts caused by Germany's unity; Germany helped the United States persuade France to support the French General Agreement in Uruguay to negotiate.As a result, the United States and Europe reached an agreement: The United States continues to provide security for Europe, while Europe supports the "new economic order" under the United States.
The United States has reached a strategic goal through the period of NATO: stabilizing Europe; making Europe a common promoter of economic globalization advocated by the United States.The United States uses the weakness of European military capabilities to further accept such an institutional arrangement in Europe: as the Western European Union, which is a European independent military forces, has also become the European pillar of NATO; it is synchronized with the EU expansion and NATO's eastward expansion.
Since 2001, Bush's unilateral principles have caused serious cracks in European and American relations, which has strengthened the determination of Europe to pursue multi -polarization.In January 2009, after Obama's office, the Atlantic relations were properly repaired.However, European and American contradictions are still because the United States has decided to move the strategic focus eastward. To this end, the European allies are offensive and actively improved relations with Russia in order to implement the "Asian re -balance" strategy against China.
France in the old European countries has weakened the US hegemony, and Germany's actual interests of Energy dependence tend to adopt an appeasement attitude towards Russia -typically reflected in the signing of the Sikh Agreement in 2014.After Trump came to power, the cracks of the Atlantic Alliance further expanded, and the two sides were not allowed to pay off around the defense costs, which almost led to NATO "brain death".
In 2022, the Russian and Ukraine War, China's war wolf diplomacy, and the fact that Sino -Russian facts formed the "Iron and Steel Alliance" (May 2024) -This promotion to NATO's resurrection.The failure of Russia's disposal eventually prompted the three old European countries of France and Germany to abandon appeasementism, form a common front with the United States to support Ukraine's anti -aggression, and achieve unprecedented unity in the Western world since the end of World War II.
The role of the United States as a European security guarantee once again highlights -not only provides Ukraine with the largest proportion of military assistance, but also increases troops to NATO 20,000 to NATO, so that the total strength of the total troops in Europe has reached 100,000.In 2023, US defense expenditure was US $ 860 billion, accounting for 3.5%of GDP (GDP), 10 times to Germany, accounting for 68%of the total defense expenditure of all member states in NATO.It can be said that leaving the United States, even if Europe represented by France has a big ambition, it is unable to fill such a huge power vacuum in the short term and give the heavy responsibility to defend Europe.
The NATO "radical shift" proposed by Trump is the core is to revise the "responsibility" of the defense "responsibility" claimed in the past as "responsibility transfer", which greatly reduces the United StatesThe security role is limited to providing nuclear umbrellas for Europe, and a helping to Europe at the time of crisis -the so -called "Dormant Nato" concept, that is, completely hand over conventional defense responsibilities to EuropeThe United States only plays the role of "Quasi-Silent".
Trump does not seem to care about European military sitting, which is in sharp contrast to the old Bush government's preservation of European psychology.In the short term, the inherent weakness of the European defense production system is indeed not worth the anxiety of the United States -so far, European weapon production is still highly related to the dignity and sovereignty of national countries, and it has been fragmented. For example, there are 178 different types of European Europe in Europe.There are only 30 types of weapon systems in the United States; for example, there are 17 main battle tank systems in Europe, and there are only one in the United States.The lack of professional division of labor and scale economy has led to inefficient and waste of the European defense industry.This is exactly the lag by the European political integration, which delays the pace of strategic independence in Europe.
NATO European Huaizhuo to freely deal with China
Trump's current Trump unintentionally abandon NATO, but instead wakes up Europe -by promoting the Europeanization of NATO and liberation of the United States, so that he can make full efforts to deal with China.This is because China's danger is much larger than that of Russia -especially when it is joined forces with Russia; the United States is not enough to deal with the joint power of China and Russia by relying on its own power.In Trump's view, NATO's "radical steering" is very urgent.
In terms of Europe's own interests, it is a question of whether it is "checks and balances or a stool" in terms of security relations with the United States.Although the "car" can minimize the cost of maintaining welfare countries, it is always relying on US military protection, which will inevitably greatly contain the strategic autonomy of European minds, leading to a multi -polarized dream.
In fact, checks and balances and stools are by no means clear.The European military system and NATO have basically achieved the connection between the combat system. The total force of NATO's rapid reaction force is expanding from 40,000 to 300,000.The Europeanization of NATO means that Europe has great initiative in conventional power control; coupled with the military forces of Europe itself -whether it is the British and French Expeditionary Force or the United Expeditionary Force composed of the British leadership, it is becoming incompetentEuropean hard power.
This shows that NATO's "radical steering" will not only weaken NATO, but will make it stronger.The reconstruction of the Ukrainian war and the corresponding world political pattern has brought rare opportunities to the reorganization of European political structure, through a certain degree of militaryization, accelerating the political integration of common diplomatic and security policies.Although the road to reorganization will not be smooth, it is in line with the long -term interests of Europe. As long as the politicians are guided by the situation, it is unrealistic.Just as the European integration has not lacks imitation, pauses, and even retreating in the past 67 years, the overall trend is still constantly moving forward.After Brexit in 2016, Britain quickly launched the process of "facts returning to Europe"; before and after, it became the most important leader of European militaryization.
In the Cold War period, in order to reconstruct the global capitalist system and deal with the Soviet Union during the Cold War, it will make Europe a future economic rival; in the New Cold War era, the United States does not hesitate to make Europe grow into a new military power for the challenge of China.But this will be a new global country that supports the Atlantic Alliance with "ensuring that the 21st century is the European and American century, not the Chinese century".The German Federal Government European and American relations coordinator Peter Bayer, on April 21, 2021, we need this to point out this point of the Die Zeit's article.Such a powerful European Europe, which is both interdependent and mutually restrained, is conducive to world peace.
The author is a visiting scholar at the School of Political Economics of London
