European military forces are working on a plan of 5 to 10 years to replace us with NATO

Open the newsletter to watch the White House for free

Your guide to what the American elections mean 2024 for Washington and the world

The largest military forces in Europe are developing plans to assume greater responsibilities to defend the continent from the United States, including the stadium to the Trump administration for the runway through the five to the next ten.

Discussions are an attempt to avoid the chaos of American withdrawal from one side NATOFear by President Donald Trump’s frequent threats to weaken or move away from the Atlantic alliance that has protected Europe for nearly eight decades.

The United Kingdom, France, Germany and the northern northern European are among the countries that participate in informal discussions, but the organization, according to four European officials involved. Their goal is to reach a plan to transform the financial and military burden into European capitals and bring them to the United States before the NATO annual leaders in The Hague in June.

The proposal will include firm obligations about increasing spending on European defense and building military capabilities, in an attempt to persuade Trump to agree to a gradual surrender that would allow the United States to focus more on Asia.

The United States, which is spent on defense more than all other NATO allies combined, is indispensable for European security.

In addition to its nuclear deterrent, which is committed to defending Europe with many European Air Force carrying American nuclear weapons, it provides military capabilities that are not owned by continental allies, and they manage air, naval bases and forces and contain 80,000 soldiers stationed in Europe.

The two countries, including Germany, France and the United Kingdom, have moved to increase their defensive spending or accelerate the already planned increases since Trump’s election, while the European Union has put forward initiatives for a member state to accelerate the increase in military investments.

The officials said that it would take an estimated five to 10 years of this increasing spending to raise European capabilities to a level in which they can replace most of the United States competencies, including the American nuclear deterrent.

One of the officials said: “The increase in spending is the only play that we have: exchanging the burden and converting the telephone communication away from relying on the United States.” “We started these talks, but this great task that many immersed in its standards.”

While American diplomats reassured their European counterparts that Trump is still committed to NATO membership and a mutual defense condition in Article 5, many European capitals are tense that the White House can decide quickly from the deployment of forces, equipment or secession from the joint NATO tasks.

Officials said that some capitals were not ready to engage in conversion talks for fear of encouraging the United States to move faster, believing that-despite the speech-Trump does not intend to make major changes to the country’s presence in Europe. Others are questioned that his administration agrees with an organized process given its unexpected nature.

Another of the officials said: “You need a deal with the Americans and it is not clear whether they are ready to do so.” “Can you even trust them to stick to it?”

Officials refer to continuous and regular discussions, led by France and the United Kingdom, about the formation of a “coalition of those who wish” to support Ukraine in its war against Russia and investing in European defense, as an indication of the direction of travel. Those discussions between more than ten European defense forces do not include the United States.

In response to a question about the meaning of a European pillar inside NATO and whether possible, a third of the Great officials answered: “We see now: the United Kingdom and France takes the initiative (on the strength of reassurance to Ukraine) without the Americans.”

NATO officials argue that preserving the coalition with less or not in the United States was much simpler than creating a new structure, given the difficulty of creating or re -negotiating its current military plans to defend the continent, the goals of its capacity and rules, the structure of its matter and Article 5.

Officials said the main defense of Europe will always require the United Kingdom and other Atlantic naval forces, northern European northern European and Turkey for the southeastern defense, officials said: The membership that NATO already has.

“Even without the United States, NATO provides a structure of security cooperation in Europe,” said Marion Mimer, a major international security colleague in Chatham House.

“There are aspects that must be replaced if the United States is not dismantled. However, it provides a structure and infrastructure that the Europeans are familiar.