European leaders are quietly advancing contingency plans to sustain NATO without the United States, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.
The emerging concept — informally dubbed a “European NATO” — is gaining traction following a significant political shift in Germany, long a holdout against efforts to build a more autonomous European defense structure. Officials involved say the goal is not to replace NATO, but to preserve deterrence against Russia and maintain operational continuity if Washington reduces its military footprint or declines to come to Europe’s defense.
The planning, which has accelerated in recent months through informal discussions among allied officials, reflects deepening anxiety across Europe about U.S. reliability. Those concerns intensified after Trump threatened to withdraw from NATO and made controversial remarks about seizing Greenland, a territory of fellow alliance member Denmark.
Under the proposal, European countries would take on a larger share of NATO’s command-and-control structure, replacing U.S. leadership roles in areas such as logistics, intelligence and operational planning. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has acknowledged the shift, saying the alliance is becoming “more European-led.”
The change is being driven less by U.S. pressure — which has long called for burden-sharing — and more by Europe’s own strategic recalculation. “A burden shifting from the U.S. toward Europe is ongoing and it will continue,” said Alexander Stubb, who is among the leaders involved in shaping the effort.
At the center of the shift is German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, whose government has begun rethinking Berlin’s longstanding reliance on Washington as Europe’s ultimate security guarantor. For decades, Germany resisted French-led calls for greater defense autonomy, fearing it could weaken transatlantic ties. That position has changed amid concerns that U.S. policy under Trump lacks consistency and could leave Europe exposed.
Germany’s pivot has unlocked broader support from countries including the United Kingdom, France, Poland and the Nordic states, with officials now exploring practical questions that were once politically off-limits. These include who would lead NATO’s air and missile defense systems, how troops would be reinforced along the alliance’s eastern flank, and how large-scale military exercises would be coordinated without U.S. leadership.
Still, the challenges are formidable. NATO’s structure has been built around American capabilities for decades, from intelligence and satellite surveillance to nuclear deterrence. European officials acknowledge that replacing those assets — particularly the U.S. nuclear umbrella — would be difficult and time-consuming.
Efforts are already underway to close some of those gaps. European governments are looking to expand defense spending, revive conscription in some countries and accelerate production of critical military technologies, including advanced missile systems and reconnaissance capabilities.
Yet even proponents of the plan stress that the goal is not a clean break with Washington. Instead, they envision a NATO alliance that remains transatlantic in structure but is far less dependent on U.S. leadership.
“The most important thing is to do it in a managed and controllable way,” Stubb said, warning against a sudden American withdrawal that could destabilize the alliance.
(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)
