In which case it's a statement that the US no longer stands behind Europe in the event of any Russian attack.
The US plans to significantly reduce its military contributions to NATO.
According to information obtained by SPIEGEL, the US government intends to significantly reduce the number of weapons systems and soldiers available to NATO. Washington is thus increasing the pressure: the Europeans must quickly close the resulting gaps.
The US plans to drastically reduce its military contributions to NATO. According to information obtained by SPIEGEL, an envoy from US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth briefed high-ranking officials from other member states at NATO headquarters late last week. Washington reportedly intends to provide NATO with significantly fewer key military capabilities in the future as part of the alliance's force planning, including US fighter jets, warships, drones, and tanker aircraft.
The US is planning to significantly scale back its existing commitments to the so-called "NATO Force Model." The resulting gaps would have to be filled quickly by the Europeans themselves. The alliance agreed on this model in 2022 following Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It stipulates which units and military capabilities from member states the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) can directly access to ensure deterrence and the defense of Europe.
The briefing by Pentagon official Alexander Velez-Green was eagerly anticipated in Brussels. The US has been pressing for a redistribution of military burdens within the alliance for some time. Under the existing burden-sharing system, the US provided roughly half of the military capabilities. Now, the US is demanding a redistribution ("burden shifting"). Last Friday, Hegseth's advisor, Velez-Green, presented the NATO political directors with concrete figures outlining the US's specific proposals for this.
The US proposals for future military planning were more drastic than the Europeans had anticipated. European diplomats had assumed before the meeting that it would involve minor adjustments over time. However, according to information obtained by SPIEGEL, the US intends, for example, to contribute significantly fewer strategic bombers to NATO, and a reduction of one-third in the US fighter jet contribution is also being discussed. According to European government representatives, the crucial question is what timeframe the Americans are basing their plans on.
One way to compensate for the shortfall in fighter jets would be through the ongoing deliveries of F-35 aircraft to European allies. The German armed forces are scheduled to take delivery of the first aircraft from the US next year. Poland has just received its first three F-35s. However, European NATO states do not possess strategic bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons. The two aircraft carriers that the US had previously registered for deployment under the NATO Force Model are also unlikely to be easily replaced.
However, the US has made it clear that it intends to maintain nuclear deterrence in Europe within the framework of NATO. In contrast, the Europeans are expected to largely shoulder the conventional defense of the continent on their own. Accordingly, the US Navy will maintain fewer destroyers for NATO, the US envoy reported. The US will no longer contribute submarines to NATO. Europeans will also provide their own reconnaissance drones, and the US plans to significantly reduce its involvement with armed drones.
The message from President Donald Trump's administration in the closed-door meeting was unequivocal: According to US envoy Velez-Green, the allies are urged to close the emerging gaps as quickly as possible. The US is prepared to cooperate closely with all NATO partners who now act swiftly, he stated. Some in the meeting interpreted this as an indirect threat.
From the US perspective, the planned step is logical. A reduction in American capabilities is realistic and responsible, explained Pete Hegseth's advisor, since many Europeans invest more in defense and are capable of contributing more. At the NATO summit in The Hague last June, member states, under pressure from US President Trump, committed to increasing defense spending to a total of five percent of their economic output.
A Turning Point in NATO
The figures cited by Pete Hegseth's envoy herald nothing less than a turning point within NATO. For months, the US government has been proclaiming its vision of "NATO 3.0." According to this vision, the Europeans must shoulder the entire conventional defense of their contingent as quickly as possible. Now, for the first time, the other members have an idea of how quickly this NATO reorientation is to be implemented.
According to military experts, the figures cited by Hegseth's envoy are more significant than the previously known details about the withdrawal of a few thousand troops from individual European countries. While headquarters had expected Washington to reduce its own military contributions, the Europeans are now expected to act by the next meeting in early June: At the planned "Force Sourcing Conference," the US expects proposals outlining which countries can step in, in which areas, and when.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who also serves as Trump's National Security Advisor, emphasized the US commitments in the Indo-Pacific, the Western Hemisphere, and the Middle East at a meeting with his NATO counterparts in Sweden last week. He stated that the goal is to develop a strategy that is both functional and realistic for NATO, allowing the US to prepare for a two-front conflict.
US defense planning has been focused for some time on a potential escalation in the Indo-Pacific. The year 2027 is considered a key date: US intelligence agencies estimate that China will then be capable of launching an attack against Taiwan. For months, US officials have been speaking of two simultaneous threat scenarios – the precarious situation in Europe and the situation in the Indo-Pacific.
Reassurances from Brussels
The sensitivity of the figures cited by Hegseth's advisor in Brussels is evident in the reactions. Over the Pentecost weekend, the German government referred inquiries to NATO, declining to comment on the information itself, which was also classified. It is known that, with a total strength of 185,000 soldiers, the German armed forces currently maintain approximately 30,000 troops and about 200 fighter jets and warships on standby for the alliance, which must be ready for deployment within 30 days if NATO requests them in a crisis.
The US contribution to each category, either in absolute numbers or relative to its European NATO partners, is unknown. Fundamentally, the US requests do not necessarily imply a withdrawal of US troops from Europe. Military sources indicated that Washington primarily aims to achieve greater flexibility through this reduction should a conflict erupt in the Indo-Pacific. In this case, the US government does not want to be bound by registering military capabilities with NATO. Furthermore, the "NATO Force Model" also includes units stationed in the US that would only be deployed in a crisis.
The planned reduction does not mean, according to military officials, that the US will not step in should a national defense emergency arise in Europe. The NATO Force Model differentiates between troops based on their operational readiness: there are troops that the Supreme Allied Commander can access within ten days at the latest, those that must be available within 10 to 30 days, and others that must be ready within 30 to 180 days.
Nevertheless, the figures from Washington are putting the Europeans under considerable pressure. The German government is already discussing how to respond. By the beginning of June, the European NATO partners must decide what they can offer in terms of their own capabilities to close the gaps. At headquarters, it was stated that Washington would like to present the new burden-sharing plan at the NATO summit in Ankara in July. Therefore, mere declarations of intent are unlikely to suffice for the Europeans.
NATO leadership is attempting to downplay the situation. A spokeswoman for Secretary General Mark Rutte told SPIEGEL that in the past there had been an "excessive dependence" on the US in NATO's military planning. However, Europe and Canada are now investing more in defense, so it is possible to "shift the weight of responsibility."