European allies are drawing up contingency plans to defend the continent through NATO’s existing structures if the United States reduces its role in the alliance, according to a media report, amid growing concerns over Washington’s long-term commitment.
The discussions come against the backdrop of tensions linked to the Iran conflict and uncertainty over former US president Donald Trump’s stance on NATO. Officials are reportedly exploring what some have described as a “European NATO” model, aimed at increasing European leadership within the alliance’s command structure while reducing reliance on US military assets.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the proposals are being discussed informally within NATO circles and are not intended to replace the alliance. Instead, they are designed to preserve deterrence against Russia, ensure operational continuity, and maintain nuclear credibility in the event of a partial US withdrawal.
The initiative has reportedly gained traction after receiving backing from Germany, traditionally cautious about a Europe-led defence framework. A shift in Berlin under Chancellor Friedrich Merz reflects growing concern about the reliability of US security guarantees.
The push also reflects unease over Trump’s repeated criticism of NATO allies. He has described European partners as “cowards” and the alliance itself as a “paper tiger,” while also suggesting US support could be reconsidered if European states do not align with Washington’s priorities, including on Iran.
European leaders, however, stress that any transition must be gradual. Finnish President Alexander Stubb said the shift of defence responsibilities from the US to Europe was already underway.
“A burden shift from the US toward Europe is ongoing and it will continue,” he said, adding that the process must be “managed and controllable” rather than abrupt.
German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius also reaffirmed NATO’s central role, calling it “irreplaceable both for Europe and the US,” while noting that Europeans must assume greater responsibility for their own defence.
Despite growing political momentum, significant structural challenges remain. NATO’s military framework is heavily dependent on US capabilities, particularly in logistics, intelligence, command-and-control systems, and strategic deterrence.
While European countries have increased participation in senior command roles and multinational exercises, major gaps persist in intelligence gathering, missile warning systems, and nuclear deterrence capacity. No European power currently matches the reach of the US nuclear umbrella that underpins NATO’s security architecture.
Efforts are underway to narrow these gaps through expanded European defence cooperation, including joint weapons development and discussions on strengthening France’s nuclear deterrent role within Europe.
The debate has also revived interest in conscription in some countries, with proponents arguing that national service could improve readiness. Finland, which maintains mandatory military service, is often cited as a model.
However, officials acknowledge that Europe cannot quickly replace the United States as NATO’s primary military power. Years of underinvestment in defence are expected to take time to reverse.
The urgency of the debate has increased amid broader geopolitical strains, including disagreements over Iran and shifting dynamics in transatlantic relations.
Founded in 1949, NATO has long relied on US military dominance as the foundation of collective defence. While calls for European strategic autonomy have grown in recent years, they have yet to translate into a fully independent defence capability.
Any structural shift within NATO could have wider global implications, particularly for security dynamics involving Europe, West Asia, and the Indo-Pacific, analysts say.
Source: The Hans India
Bd-pratidin English/ Jisan
