NATO, the War in Ukraine, and A Changing American Presence

NATO is in an awkward position.  Russia's war in Ukraine has raged into its third year, and although the Trump Administration has proposed deals which they believe will bring peace, there is not an ideal end in sight.  The now infamous meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump, and Vice President J.D. Vance in the Oval Office has done nothing to quell NATO countries' concerns.  The United States has very quickly changed its approach to international relations.  What does this mean for NATO?  How will Ukraine fair as it continues to defend itself from Russia?

Donald Trump has greatly changed the position the United States has held on the global stage since the end of the Second World War.  He has made isolationism the first pillar of US foreign policy thus far in his second term.  Although he echoed many of these isolationist sentiments in his first term, the world was a very different place.  The war in Ukraine has changed how NATO views collective security.  It is perhaps more important than ever to maintain.  Trump's re-election to the White House has made matters of European security and other issues of concern to NATO blurry at best.  The United States is a major contributor to NATO, and one of the founding members of the alliance.  Without its support, Europe's security becomes far more fraught.  

War on the European continent seemed unfathomable in the 21st century.  When it arrived, NATO acted as an immediate buffer between Russia and the west.  In a sense, the iron curtain was rebuilt.  The United States was supportive of Ukraine and NATO, vowing to continue to supply military aid and contribute to the collective security goals the North Atlantic treaty outlines.  Since Trump's re-election, the United States has taken a turn, and has said it instead will try to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine, perhaps even if peace means on Russia's terms.  This seems to be easier said than done; Russia has only agreed to partial ceasefires on essential infrastructure, such as power grids, but they have not, and likely will not agree to a full ceasefire outside of very specific terms that are advantageous to them.

With this new reality, European countries must reckon with an uncomfortable fact.  They will have to decrease their reliance on the United States for security affirmations.  They will need to increase their spending on defense, and continue to cooperate with each other in a collective security fashion.  This may fundamentally change the way NATO operates.  Perhaps NATO will not be the first line of defense for Europe in the current geopolitical climate.  No matter how events may unravel, Europe has to begin the process of relying on itself for collective security in the absence of American support.  Even if the United States does come around to supporting NATO in a larger capacity with a different administration in the future, the current order is a wake up call to European countries that reliance on America is not always a winning strategy.

Ukraine's concerns are still immediate, as they continue to face attacks from the Russian military.  They too will have to decrease their hopes of American support, and lean in on support from Western European countries, as well as countries such as Canada and Australia.  It is hard to predict how exactly the war with Russia will end for Ukraine.  If it were to end today, Russia would claim roughly 20 percent of Ukraine's territory.  This is obviously not an ideal end for Ukraine's and Europe's interests, and it would likely embolden Russia to continue their conquests to expand their borders.  

Ukraine and Europe have to prepare for a broad spectrum of possibilities.  Russia may come away from the conflict at an advantage.  Western Europe and Ukraine may come away stronger and Russia weaker.  Whatever the case may be, if they are able to increase self-reliance on security, while also maintaining the collective security of the continent, with or without America's support, the outcome may be better for European security, and more broadly, the world's security.