Trump, NATO, and the Future of Collective Defence: A Fragile Alliance?
About NATO
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) is a collective security alliance comprising 32 member states. Founded in 1949, its primary objective is to safeguard the freedom and security of its members through political and military means. The cornerstone of the alliance is Article 5 of the treaty, which stipulates that an armed attack against one member is considered an attack against all. This collective defence clause has only been invoked once, following the September 11th attacks in 2001 (Clapp and Verhelst, 2022).
Trump’s stance towards NATO
Donald Trump has consistently expressed scepticism towards NATO. During his first presidential term, Trump repeatedly threatened to withdraw the United States from the alliance (Keating, 2025). Serving under Trump as a special government employee, Musk has argued that NATO is disproportionately beneficial to Europe, describing it as “a great deal for Europe, but a raw deal for America” (Kilander, 2025). His dissatisfaction stems largely from the perception that European allies are not contributing fairly to defence spending. In 2018, Trump privately warned of a potential U.S. withdrawal from NATO, citing the failure of some member states to meet the 2% of GDP defence spending target (Peck, 2025) – underscoring the long-felt disapproval he has had of the organisation.
Trump’s criticism has escalated in recent years. In 2024, he controversially stated that Russia should do “whatever the hell they want” (Kilander, 2025) to NATO members failing to meet their spending commitments. This undermines the principle of collective defence outlined in Article 5, raising doubts about the U.S.’s commitment to the alliance. Trump has also claimed that NATO was “gone” before his presidency and that Russia would only view NATO as a credible threat if the U.S. remained involved in the alliance (Moore, 2025). These remarks signal a broader shift in U.S. strategic priorities and threaten NATO’s cohesion.
The Future of NATO
While Trump’s rhetoric raises concerns about NATO’s stability, legal safeguards complicate the prospect of a US withdrawal., The 2020 provision in the National Defence Authorization Act (Peck, 2025) prohibits a president from unilaterally withdrawing from NATO without congressional approval. As a result, this provision generates uncertainty over whether Trump has the authority to withdraw from the treaty if he chooses to.
Despite his antagonistic rhetoric towards NATO during his first term, Trump has successfully maintained diplomatic ties with key NATO allies. In February, he welcomed UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron to the White House – signalling the U.S.’s wish to keep working relationships with NATO allies intact. However, this antagonistic approach has weakened the alliance’s perceived credibility. NATO’s collective defence principle depends on mutual trust and the belief that all members will uphold Article 5 if attacked. Trump’s open scepticism challenges this foundation, making it harder for member states to rely on U.S. support in a crisis. Keating (2025) has claimed that Trump’s actions undermine the bedrock of Western security strategy for nearly 80 years, and believes that the effect of a U.S. pullback from NATO will be widespread and unpredictable (Peck, 2025).
European members have prepared to assume greater responsibility in defence, as a reduced role in NATO by the U.S. would cause strategic challenges to arise. However, Europe would not be defenceless in this case, as NATO possesses over one million troops and advanced technological capabilities from its remaining 31 member states (Lendon, 2025). Germany, as the second-largest contributor, is positioned to assume a greater leadership role. Analysts suggest that Europe could compensate for the loss of U.S. support through increased investment in defence infrastructure and greater strategic coordination (Lendon, 2025). Furthermore, the U.S. maintains 31 permanent military bases in Europe, including naval air, and ground command facilities. This embedded infrastructure ensures that the U.S. retains a strategic presence in Europe, even if its political commitment to NATO diminishes.
How has the Russia-Ukraine conflict complicated NATO’s standing?
The Russia-Ukraine conflict has posed significant strategic and political challenges for NATO. Although Ukraine is not a NATO member, it is recognised as a close NATO partner (NATO, 2024). In response to Russia’s invasion in 2022, NATO condemned Moscow’s actions and provided Ukraine with unprecedented levels of military and logistical support. Economic sanctions on Russia were coordinated across NATO members, reflecting a united front. However, NATO has deliberately avoided direct military engagement to prevent escalation.
Trump’s stance on Russia has significantly complicated NATO’s position, as his pivot towards Russia has largely been perceived as alarming, further eroding trust and threatening the alliance’s stability (Keating, 2025). The U.S. and Ukraine recently proposed a 30-day ceasefire to Russia (Wright, 2025), but Moscow’s demands – including Ukraine’s exclusion from NATO membership and its neutrality in any peace deal – reflect Russia’s ongoing resistance to NATO’s influence in Eastern Europe. Trump’s openness to accommodating Russia’s interests raises concerns about whether the U.S. would honour its collective defence commitments under Article 5 if tensions with Russia escalated. The legal ambiguity over whether Article 5 would be honoured is outlined by Wang (2025), where the complex legal and strategic challenges facing NATO are displayed in the context of UK troops being deployed to Ukraine.
It is evident that Trump’s presidency and the Russia-Ukraine conflict have challenged NATO’s strategic position. Trump’s scepticism towards the alliance undermines confidence in Article 5 , and raises questions about the future of defence without U.S. participation as it largely remains uncertain. However, the 2020 provision requiring congressional approval for withdrawal provides a level of safeguard for NATO, even as Trump’s rhetoric undermines general confidence in its defence capacities. Europe’s defence capabilities also suggest that NATO could adapt to a reduced U.S. presence, but strengthening internal cohesion and U.S. commitment is essential to ensure stability in the long-term. NATO’s success hinges on resolving internal divisions, strengthening U.S. commitment, and maintaining a credible deterrence stance against potential aggression.
Bibliography:
Clapp, S. and Verhelst, A. (2022). A comparative analysis of Article 5 Washington Treaty (NATO) and Article 42(7) TEU (EU). [online] European Parliamentary Research Service. Available at:
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2022/739250/EPRS_ATA(2022)73 9250_EN.pdf [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Keating, J. (2025). Has Trump already killed NATO? [online] Vox. Available at: https://www.vox.com/world-politics/404139/nato-trump-article-5-europe-russia [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Kilander, G. (2025). US senator joins Elon Musk in calling for withdrawal from NATO. [online] The Independent. Available at:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/elon-musk-nato-donald trump-b2707635.html [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Lendon, B. (2025). Can NATO survive without the United States? [online] CNN. Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/07/europe/nato-ukraine-survive-without-united-states analysis-intl-hnk-ml/index.html [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Moore, H. (2025). Trump announces ‘most lethal aircraft ever built’ as he warns Russia ‘wouldn’t be worried’ about NATO… [online] LBC. Available at:
https://www.lbc.co.uk/politics/us-politics/trump-fighter-jet-russia-nato-putin-china/ [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
NATO (2024). NATO’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. [online] NATO. Available at: https://www.nato.int/cps/em/natohq/topics_192648.htm [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Peck, M. (2025). What would happen if Trump pulls the US out of NATO? [online] Business Insider. Available at: https://www.businessinsider.com/what-would-happen-us leaves-nato-trump-2025-1 [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Wang, B. (2025). What if the US Left NATO? | NextBigFuture.com. [online] NextBigFuture.com. Available at: https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2025/03/what-if-the-us left-nato.html [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Wright, G. (2025). Peace deal must bar Ukraine from Nato, Russian official says. BBC News. [online] 17 Mar. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq6yj0m1yl7o [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
