After nearly eight decades of existence, NATO, the world's most powerful military alliance, faces an existential crisis. The fundamental certainty that the United States will come to the aid of any ally has been shattered.
As reported by Hvylya, the Financial Times writes that the policies of US President Donald Trump—who questions the Alliance's utility and has even threatened to seize Greenland from Denmark, a NATO partner—have sent shockwaves through European capitals. This is forcing America's allies to rethink their security.
"This crisis is far worse than anything we have seen in NATO's 77-year history. The idea enshrined in the 1949 treaty is dead. It's over," stated Ivo Daalder, former US Ambassador to NATO.
The Threat of Hostility, Not Just Abandonment
European leaders can no longer afford complacency. While Europe previously feared the US might simply withdraw, that fear has shifted: allies now dread outright hostility from Washington.
It has emerged that the Canadian Armed Forces even conducted scenario planning for a potential US invasion, however implausible that might seem.
"We are now engaged in a completely different discussion: do we trust US guarantees at all? It forces people to consider the unthinkable—Europe could find itself alone against a partially hostile America," says Steven Everts, Director of the EU Institute for Security Studies.
What Happens to Ukraine Without US Aid?
For Ukraine, a US withdrawal would be a heavy blow, but European and Ukrainian officials insist the consequences would not be as fatal as they seemed a year ago. Kyiv's dependence on American resources is declining.
First, other allies are taking the lead in intelligence. French President Emmanuel Macron stated that Paris now provides two-thirds of Ukraine's intelligence data. According to Western officials, reliance on American information could be reduced to near zero within months.
Second, the nature of the war is changing. The shift toward drone warfare and a sharp expansion of domestic arms production in Ukraine—now covering 60% of its needs—has reduced the critical dependence on overseas supplies.
Even in air defense, alternatives are emerging. This year, Ukraine is expected to receive its first Franco-Italian long-range SAMP/T NG systems. France claims these are more advanced than the American Patriot, though they have yet to be battle-tested.
The Price of Self-Reliance
Despite the optimism regarding Ukraine, defending Europe itself without the US is a nearly impossible task. The Alliance depends critically on American intelligence, satellites, transport aircraft, and command systems.
To directly replace the US contribution, Europe would require approximately $1 trillion and decades of time. For example, building a spy satellite network to replace America's would take over 10 years.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte remains skeptical of total autonomy:
"If you truly want to go it alone, forget 5% of GDP for defense. It will be 10%. You would have to create your own nuclear capability. That costs billions and billions of euros."
Nevertheless, experts believe Europe's goal is not to mirror the US, but to outmatch Russia.
"It’s not about being as powerful as the US, which would take us 15 years. It’s simply about being better than the Russians," argues Carlo Masala, a professor at the Bundeswehr University Munich. In his view, this goal is achievable within 3-4 years.
For now, European leaders are torn between the hope of "managing" Trump and the harsh necessity of preparing for the worst to avoid being squeezed between an aggressive Russia and an unpredictable America.
