The American think tank website "The National Interest" published an article titled "Why NATO Will Not Fall Apart" on January 30. The author is Ramon Max. Here is the translation of the article:

This historic Western alliance is more likely to evolve to meet America's demands for strengthening Europe.

NATO members must face the fact that, after more than 75 years of development under the NATO framework, they must take primary responsibility for their own defense. They can no longer rely on the United States to continue being their first line of protection. The dispute over Greenland has even exacerbated concerns about the possibility of the US completely withdrawing from NATO.

However, the recently released "2026 Defense Strategy" shows the opposite: the US will not abandon NATO. Approximately 80,000 US troops are stationed in Europe, and there are currently no signs indicating that US bases will be closed or personnel and supplies will be withdrawn to the US. Ironically, the largest military base in Germany remains a US military base, not a German one. The US continues to maintain close ties with its European allies, whether conducting joint infantry exercises and operations in Poland and Latvia, or conducting joint patrols with NATO allies' warships in the Baltic Sea or the Mediterranean. The US is not silent within NATO.

The 2026 Defense Strategy (NDS) clearly states that the US will "continue to play a crucial role within NATO..." The change lies in the fact that the US is now continuously pressuring its allies to take on greater defense responsibilities. Thanks to American diplomacy and the Ukraine war, European allies committed at the 2025 NATO summit in The Hague to increase defense spending to 5% of their GDP. The NATO Strategic Document (NDS) reiterates that while the US will "prioritize encouraging allies and partners to take primary responsibility for European defense," the Pentagon will still provide "crucial but more limited US support."

The NATO Strategic Document calls on allies to take on more responsibility, not out of isolationist sentiments or anger over the Greenland incident, but based on a harsh reality: Russia is not the only global challenge facing the US. The document notes that the US military must not only address challenges in Europe, but also in the Middle East, China, the Korean Peninsula, the Western Hemisphere, and even Africa. The US has recently conducted military operations in Nigeria to combat Islamic extremists.

The US faces many challenges. Urging NATO European member states to take on more of their regional responsibilities is urgent. In fact, as early as when NATO was established in 1949, General Dwight Eisenhower anticipated that the US military's dominant position within the alliance would not last long. He once said, "If ten years later, all US troops stationed in Europe to carry out defense missions have not yet returned to the US, then the entire NATO plan would fail."

Eisenhower's vision of NATO and the US playing a temporary important role has not been realized, but fortunately, NATO eventually survived. Giving more responsibility to European forces at this time is not an unreasonable reaction to the Greenland incident, nor is it a sign of rising isolationism. It is a much-needed strategic adjustment among allies aimed at helping the Pentagon deal with increasingly severe challenges in other parts of the world.

While building hard power in Europe, Europe also needs to moderate its radical use of soft power in values. The dangerous disconnection between Brussels' ambitious soft power goals and NATO (Europe's real military strength) is increasingly evident.

The consequences of the failed negotiations between Brussels and Ukraine on EU membership indicate that excessive use of soft power can bring catastrophic strategic consequences to the entire continent. Brussels completely underestimated Russia's reaction to Ukraine potentially joining the EU. George Kennan had warned for decades that any effort to integrate Ukraine into the West would be futile. For Russia, this is seen as an unbreakable red line. In 2008, William Burns, then-US ambassador to Russia, issued a cable titled "No Means No" warning that any move by Ukraine towards the West could trigger an extreme Russian reaction. Even Angela Merkel had lingering concerns about any Western agreement with Ukraine.

However, EU negotiators viewed the issue of Ukraine as purely an economic and regulatory matter, believing there were no potential security risks. Moscow saw this process as a major strategic threat aimed at firmly pulling Kyiv into the Western camp and ultimately joining NATO.

Subsequently, EU trade diplomats reached a new level of miscalculations regarding Moscow. They unnecessarily triggered a significant political crisis in Ukraine, starting with the sentencing of former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko to seven years in prison by a Ukrainian court for corruption. Brussels considered the prosecution of Tymoshenko a violation of the rule of law and demanded her release as a necessary condition for any agreement between the EU and Kyiv.

This demand sparked a fierce political controversy in Kyiv. Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and his supporters viewed Tymoshenko as their strongest and most dangerous political opponent. The EU's push for Tymoshenko's release played a key role in Yanukovych's decision to stop negotiations with Brussels and instead pursue trade talks with Russia. His move closer to Moscow triggered the 2014 Euromaidan protests, forcing the elected Yanukovych to flee to Russia.

Three days after Yanukovych's ousting, Russian "green men" entered Crimea. Despite this, the EU continued to push forward with negotiations with the new government. Shortly after the occupation of Crimea in March 2014, the EU signed a partnership agreement with Crimea.

Since then until 2022, Ukraine's integration into the West accelerated. In 2019, Ukraine passed a constitutional amendment committing to formally join the EU and NATO. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, and the situation has since been set in stone. So far, the total number of casualties caused by the war is estimated to be close to 2 million. If European allies want to avoid such tragic consequences in the future, they must adopt a more cautious diplomatic strategy in pursuing their goals of a free order. Soft power alone is not enough to deal with Moscow.

Unless Russia directly invades an ally bound by NATO's Article Five, given the US's global responsibilities, it cannot be expected to provide military support to European allies in any situation, especially when European allies excessively rely on soft power. If European allies truly wish to become reliable forces for European stability and progress, they must enhance their military deterrence capabilities.

Currently, some positive signs of the revival of European military power are emerging. In addition to committing to increase defense budgets, two NATO allies - the UK and France - recently collaborated on an operation, with the French Marine successfully seizing a "ghost fleet" oil tanker carrying sanctioned Russian oil. Playing a greater naval role in enforcing sanctions on Russian oil alongside willing European allies would be a step in the right direction.

Such actions can give European allies greater influence, thereby affecting their surrounding affairs, including peace talks with Ukraine. Currently, they are basically bystanders in this process, watching Washington control these discussions.

The NATO alliance will continue to exist. Even due to the Greenland issue, the US will not abandon NATO. But for long-term existence, the alliance must develop and evolve. The US's allies must become military partners equal to the US. Eisenhower's view was basically correct. Ultimately, the main responsibility for maintaining regional security will fall on a prosperous and capable Europe. A stronger European NATO will send a strong signal to the world that Western democratic countries have the collective will to defend their values and maintain a stable world order through hard power.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7601690909683483136/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author alone.