Azerbaijan.US
For decades, NATO has been the backbone of European security. But today, the alliance is showing visible strain – not from external pressure alone, but from growing disagreements within Europe itself over how much it should rely on the United States and whether the continent needs its own independent military force.
The debate has sharpened amid uncertainty over Washington’s long-term commitment to European security. Calls from U.S. leaders for Europe to shoulder a greater share of defense costs have forced a long-avoided question back onto the agenda: can Europe defend itself without America?
Inside the alliance, views diverge sharply. Eastern European states, particularly those closest to Russia, continue to see NATO – and U.S. military presence – as an irreplaceable security guarantee. For them, any weakening of transatlantic ties raises existential concerns.
Western Europe, however, is increasingly split. France and Germany have revived discussions about “strategic autonomy,” arguing that Europe must be capable of acting independently when U.S. priorities shift elsewhere. Proposals range from deeper military coordination to the long-discussed but never realized idea of a European army.
Yet consensus remains elusive. Europe lacks a unified command structure, a shared defense budget, and – most critically – political unity on when and how force should be used. Historical anxieties also linger. For some countries, the prospect of a re-militarized Germany still triggers unease, while others question whether France’s leadership ambitions would dominate any European force.
Meanwhile, NATO itself faces institutional fatigue. Designed for Cold War realities, the alliance struggles to adapt to a fragmented world defined by hybrid threats, regional wars, and shifting global power centers. Enlargement has expanded NATO’s geography, but also multiplied its internal contradictions.
The war in Ukraine has temporarily masked these tensions by restoring a sense of urgency and unity. But beneath the surface, disagreements over burden-sharing, decision-making, and future strategy persist – and are likely to intensify once the immediate crisis stabilizes.
Europe’s dilemma is no longer theoretical. It is structural. Remaining fully dependent on U.S. protection carries political and strategic risks. Building an independent military capability, however, would require resources, leadership, and unity that Europe has yet to demonstrate.
For now, NATO remains intact. But the debate over Europe’s own army signals a deeper shift: the transatlantic order is no longer taken for granted, and Europe is being forced – reluctantly and unevenly – to rethink what security really means in a changing world.
