Article originally in the Financial Times. Other articles .
The largest European military powers are preparing plans to take more responsibility from the United States for the defense of Europe. They also include a proposal for Trump’s government for a controlled handover over the next five to ten years.
Discussions are an attempt to avoid chaos that could occur in the event of a one -sided appearance of the United States from NATO. Concerns have triggered the repeated threats of President Donald Trump that he would weaken the Transatlantic Alliance, which has been protecting Europe for almost eight decades or will emerge.
Gradual handover of powers
According to four European officials involved, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Nordic states are among the countries involved in informal but structured discussions. Their aim is to develop a plan to move financial and military burden to European states and to submit it to the United States before the NATO’s annual summit, which will take place in June in the Hague.
The proposal should include fixed commitments concerning the increase in Europe’s defense and building capacity expenditure in an effort to convince Trump to agree to the gradual transfer of powers that would allow the United States to focus more on Asia.
The United States, which is spent more than all other NATO allies, are irreplaceable for European security. Several European Air Force carries US nuclear weapons.
In addition to their nuclear deterrent funds that serve to defend Europe, the United States provides military capacities that the continental allies do not have, operate air, naval and military bases and have 80,000 soldiers placed in Europe.
Too much task
Countries, including Germany, France and the United Kingdom from Trump’s election, have increased their defense spending, or have accelerated the planned increase. The EU has prepared initiatives for accelerating the increase in military investment for its Member States.
It is estimated that five to ten years of these increased spending would be needed to increase European capacities to replace most US competences, official officials said without including US nuclear deterioration.
“Increasing spending is the only option we have: sharing a burden and moving weight from the United States addiction,” one of the officials said. “We are starting these interviews, but it’s such a big task that many are surprised by its scope.”
Although US diplomats have assured their European partners that Trump is still devoted to NATO membership and Article 5 on mutual defense, many European states are nervous about the fact that the White House could decide to quickly limit their troops or equipment or not to participate in common NATO tasks.
The coalition willing to indicate direction
Some states were not willing to engage in interviews on the transmission of the burden of fear of encouraging America to do more faster, official officials said Trump, despite its rhetoric, does not intend to make significant changes in the presence of the country in Europe.
Others are skeptical that his government would even agree with the structured process with regard to its unpredictable nature. “You need an agreement with the Americans and it is not clear whether they will be willing to do it,” another official said. “Can they even believe that they will keep it?”
Representatives point out that ongoing regular discussions under the leadership of France and the United Kingdom of creating a “coalition of willing”, which would support Ukraine in her war against Russia and invested in European defense, suggesting direction. These discussions between more than ten European defense powers do not include the United States.
When asked what the European pillar in NATO means and whether it is possible, the third high Western representative answered: “We see it right now: the United Kingdom and France are taking the initiative [v otázke síl na zaistenie Ukrajiny] without Americans. ”
It will be easier to be in NATO
NATO officials argue that preserving an alliance with less or no participation of the United States was much easier than creating a new structure. The re -establishment or discussion of existing military plans for the defense of the continent, objectives and rules of capabilities, command structure and Article 5 is difficult.
The basic defense of Europe would always require the United Kingdom and other Atlantic Naval Powers, Nordic countries for the north of the continent and Turkey for the southeast defense, representatives said. He already has all these members.
“Even without the United States, NATO provides a structure for security cooperation in Europe,” said the leading researcher for international security in the Think-Tank Chatham House Marion Messmer.
“There are aspects that need to be replaced if the United States would be separated. However, NATO provides the structure and infrastructure framework that Europeans actually know … is doing a lot of work that you would have to do from the beginning if you would like to create another kind of structure for European members,” Messmer added.
© The Financial Times Limited 2025. All rights reserved. It must not be further spread, copied or modified. Ringier Slovakia Media is responsible for providing this translation. The Financial Times Limited is not responsible for the accuracy or quality of the translation.
