The Core of America’s Security

In recent weeks, Trump administration officials have suggested that America’s NATO allies wouldn’t “come and protect us” in a time of crisis. The Trump Administration cut off military and intelligence assistance to Ukraine in hopes of hastening a peace deal and said of Vladimir Putin, “We should take him at his word.” The Trump Administration floated plans to no longer have a U.S. flag officer serve as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO forces, and announced an end to U.S. participation in NATO military exercises. All of this follows President Donald Trump’s invitation to Putin’s henchmen to “do whatever the hell they want” to allies that fail to meet NATO’s defense-spending requirements.

Any one of these policies or pronouncements would suggest a fairly dramatic departure for the U.S. from its relationship with Europe (at least since the founding of NATO). However, taken together, the administration’s words and actions point to a rupture of the NATO alliance.

Clear Eyes

First things first: Toggling military assistance and intelligence sharing for Ukraine on and off, as we saw last month, isn’t statecraft. It’s self-sabotage. Policies that raise questions about America’s word, even well-intentioned policies aimed at bringing an end to a bloody war, are not beneficial for America’s security.

That said, endeavoring to make peace is a noble cause, and American presidents should pursue peace whenever possible.

“We’re a friend of peace first, last and always,” President Ronald Reagan declared. “But the American soul was forged in freedom. And we will be a friend of freedom everywhere…the foes of freedom will be our foes.”

Translation: When pursuing peace, we must be clear-eyed about who sits on the other side of the peace table—and who sits on our side of the table.

In trying to bring peace to Ukraine and trying to protect the rest of Europe from Ukraine’s fate, we must remember two truths: First, Putin isn’t interested in peace. Consider his maximalist demands (full disarmament of Ukraine, ouster of Ukraine’s democratically-elected leadership, Ukraine’s permanent neutrality, termination of NATO military support for Ukraine) and his intractable posture in peace negotiations (permanent Russian control over occupied Ukrainian territory; an ever-growing list of demands of Kiev, Washington and Europe; literally no concessions from Moscow).

Or consider the catalogue of Russian aggression during Putin’s reign: aiding and funding Taliban attacks against U.S. forces in Afghanistan; invading and dismembering NATO aspirants Ukraine and Georgia; violating the Budapest Memorandum, CFE Treaty and INF Treaty; attempting a violent coup in Montenegro on the eve of its NATO accession; launching cyberattacks against NATO member Estonia; countenancing and/or conducting cyberattacks against U.S. energy infrastructure and food supply; interfering in elections throughout NATO’s membership roster; using banned chemical nerve agents against targets in Britain; conducting sabotage operations across NATO’s footprint, including U.S. targets; threatening use of nuclear weapons; and providing targeting data to aid Houthi attacks against allied shipping.

In light of all of that—and in light of the Kremlin’s long history of deceit—Washington should never take Putin at his word. It is far better to follow Reagan’s maxim when dealing with Moscow: “Trust but verify.”

Helping Hands

The other truth we must remember is that NATO helps keep the peace and helps keep America secure.

“The Atlantic alliance is the core of America's foreign policy and America's own security,” Reagan explained. “If our fellow democracies are not secure, we cannot be secure.”

That sentiment flows both ways.

Trump says he’s “not so sure” about the willingness of NATO allies “to come and protect us.” Yet the only time NATO’s all-for-one collective defense clause has ever been invoked was when America came under attack and sought NATO’s help after 9/11. Not only did 13 NATO members rush aircraft and personnel to this side of the Atlantic to protect U.S. airspace immediately after 9/11, but in the long campaign that followed, NATO played a key role in fighting our common enemy.

NATO allies were the core of the Afghanistan security force and made real sacrifices during the Sisyphean mission: 455 Britons, 158 Canadians, 86 French, 54 Germans, 48 Italians, 43 Danes and 40 Poles were among the allied troops that died fighting our war in Afghanistan. When America pulled out of Afghanistan in August 2021, 20 years after the attacks on America’s capital, America’s military headquarters, and America’s largest city, 74 percent of the foreign troops deployed in the country that spawned 9/11 were not Americans. The vast majority were NATO allies.

That was neither the first nor the last time our NATO offered a helping hand.

Twenty countries—most of them NATO allies—deployed troops to help America repel the communist attack across the 38th Parallel.

NATO militaries, infrastructure, and decades of training and interoperability (i.e. exercises) served as the nucleus for the coalition that ejected Iraq from Kuwait in 1991. NATO allies Britain, France, Canada and Italy deployed tens of thousands of combat troops.

In Operation Iraqi Freedom, 16 NATO allies sent troops when America asked for help. Again, they made real sacrifices: 182 Brits, 36 Italians and 25 Poles were killed in Iraq.

Seven NATO allies joined U.S.-led operations against ISIS.

NATO allies Britain, Canada, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway and Spain are partnering with the U.S. on maritime-security operations in the Red Sea.

NATO allies also answer in times of natural disaster: Canada sent massive fire-smothering planes to battle the California blaze this year. In 2010, Canada, the Netherlands, and Norway helped contain the BP oil spill. In 2005, NATO dispatched assets to help after Hurricane Katrina.

Another country that answers when America asks for help is technically not even an ally, though it certainly acts like one. Ukraine sent troops to U.S.-led and NATO-led missions in Bosnia, Macedonia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, the Mediterranean, and Iraq (where 7,000 Ukrainian troops were deployed and 18 were killed).

Chain and Drain

In short, our allies do indeed help us. They aren’t all free-riders or free-loaders. They aren’t a chain dragging America into wars or a drain on American power.

The late Gen. William Odom, director of the National Security Agency under Reagan, dismissed as “myth” the notion “that our allies are making us poor by free-riding on our military expenditures.” Countering critics of our alliance system, he asked, “How are we to explain that the United States has gotten richer than its allies? Proponents of this argument cannot explain why. They fail to realize that by lowering transaction costs, our military alliances have facilitated the vast increases in international trade from which the United States profits enormously. Our military costs should be seen as investments that pay us back.”

Indeed, in the 76 years before World War II—before America began building an interconnected latticework of alliances—America’s per-capita GDP increased by 136 percent. In the 76 years between the end of World War II and 2021—thanks in part to the stability, security and predictability assured by the U.S.-led alliance system—America’s per-capita GDP increased by 320 percent.

As to the notion that our allies draw America into their wars, alliances didn’t drag America into World War I. After all, President Woodrow Wilson bluntly declared during the war, “We have no allies.” Nor was the U.S. drawn into World War II by an alliance. Rather, the trigger was Japan’s attack on an isolated outpost of an isolated America.

Yet by building a common defense, specifying clear consequences and clear commitments, and recognizing that America’s security is tied to other parts of the globe, the postwar alliance system surely helped prevent World War III.

Leading that alliance system—especially NATO, the hub of the system—enables America to harmonize differences among allies, enhances coordination of allied missions and messaging, and extends American power and influence. If Washington gives up NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander post—a post held by an American since NATO’s founding—“We would lose an enormous amount of influence within NATO,” warns Adm. James Stavridis, a former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO.

Question Marks

President Franklin Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill gave birth to the transatlantic community by drafting the Atlantic Charter. President Harry Truman and Gen. Dwight Eisenhower then established NATO—the foundation stone of the free world. President Richard Nixon drove a wedge through the communist bloc—and strengthened the free world’s hand—by splitting the PRC from the USSR. Reagan won the Cold War by revitalizing the transatlantic community and rallying the free world.

By downplaying the free world, driving a wedge between America and Europe, pulling back from NATO, and raising doubts about what Reagan called the “core” of America’s security, Trump is taking a very different approach.

What effect will this new approach have on our NATO allies? What will they do the next time we call for help?

We don’t know the answers to those questions, but one thing is certain: There will be a next time.