What degree of power will America command in NATO? Europe warily awaits U.S. secretary Marco Rubio to determine the future of the alliance

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio travels this week to a group of senior diplomats from NATO countries, and he will certainly find allies who are angry, angry and confused about the Trump administration’s desire to reformulate relations with Russia and its rhetorical attacks on Atlantic partners for a long time.

The allies feel deeply concerned about president Donald Trump’s willingness to approach Russian leader Vladimir Putin, who sees NATO as a threat, amid an American effort to mediate a ceasefire in Ukraine. The recent comments and insults in the White House have increased to NATO allies in Canada and Denmark – as well as the same military alliance – only of anxiety, especially since the new American definitions enter against friends and enemies alike.

Rubio arrives in Brussels on Thursday for two days of meetings with NATO counterparts and European officials, and he can expect to face questions about the role of the United States in the future in the alliance.

Over the course of 75 years, NATO was established on the American leadership, and based on what they saw and heard since Trump took office in January, European officials expressed his deep fears that Trump may raise all of this when he and the other NATO leaders meet at the June summit in the Netherlands.

Can Rubio reassure the allies?

As Rubio did last month at a meeting of foreign ministers from a group of 7 industrial democracies, which may be the best diplomat in America, which many abroad consider a more realistic and less ideological member in the Trump administration, able to save a collective collective approval about the war in Ocreen.

This is even as Trump said this week that Ukraine “will never be a member of NATO” even though the leaders announced at the top of last year that the country was on a “irreversible” path to join.

But Rubio will be subjected to severe pressure to explain the unjustified verbal attacks in Washington on NATO allies in Canada, which Trump says he wants to demand it as a state 51, and Denmark, in which Greenland’s lands say the United States should catch up. Both were accused of being “bad allies” by Trump and Vice President JD Vance.

“It is quite clear that there is no interest in joining America America,” said Ian Kelly, the US ambassador to Georgia during Obama, Trump Administration and Professor of International Studies at North Western University in Ivston.

He said: “There will be a lot of euro very worried about what Trump will require and what ads will issue.” “If it is not really, Rubio will be in a way to try to reassure European allies who are not, in fact, cannot be relied upon.”

However, in a little less than two months, NATO was shaken to its essence, increasingly challenged by Russia and the largest ground war in Europe since 1945 from abroad, and Trump administration from within, with relatively predictive US leadership contracts.

Trump has constantly complained about the NATO defensive members’ spending and even raised doubts about the American commitment to mutual defense in the Coalition Treaty, which says the attack on a NATO member is an attack on everyone.

Europeans take more security guarantees

Since Defense Minister Beit Higseth warned last month that US security priorities lie in another place – in Asia and on its own borders – the Europeans have waited to learn how much military clouds could be in Europe and the speed of its occurrence.

In Europe and Canada, governments are working on plans to “transfer the burden” to take over more pregnancy, while trying to ensure that there is no security vacuum if American forces and equipment are withdrawn from the continent.

These allies are keen to hear Rubio, what are the intentions of the Trump administration and hope to secure a kind of road map that puts what will happen after that and when they can synchronize planning and use European forces to fill any gaps.

At the same time, the effect of NATO’s deterrent against the opponent like Russia is equivalent only to the support of American fire. For Europeans and Canada, this means that American nuclear weapons and the sixth fleet must remain stationed in Europe.

“America is indispensable to reliable deterrence,” one of the major diplomats of NATO told reporters, provided that his identity is not disclosed.

About 100,000 American soldiers are deployed throughout the continent. European allies believe at least 20,000 individuals sent by the Biden administration after Russia launched a large -scale invasion of Ukraine three years ago.

Another priority for us the allies is to understand whether Trump believes that Russia is still the biggest security threat. In a statement of their summit last year, NATO leaders insisted that “Russia is still the most important and direct for the security of the Allied.”

But Trump capsized for Putin and the recent positive observations by some American officials raised doubts. Diplomats say that the question is the reason that the allies should spend 5 % of GDP on their defensive budgets if Russia is no longer a threat.

At the same time, Europeans and Canada know that they should spend more – not the least to protect themselves and continue to arm Ukraine. At their next summit in June, NATO leaders are expected to raise the target of the coalition’s military budget from at least 2 % to more than 3 %.

“Rubio” is in a very difficult situation. “Trump has tried to persuade the allies that reorganizing the United States with Russia is in the interest of the United States and assumes that Europe, and at the same time he told them that they needed to double their defensive spending to deal with the threats posed by Russia,” he said. “The logical question they will ask is” Why? “

This story was originally shown on Fortune.com

2025-04-02 10:51:00