NATO 3. 0: US Conventional Retrenchment and Nuclear Deterrence in Europe | RUSI - EUROPE SAYS
NATO 3. 0: US Conventional Retrenchment and Nuclear Deterrence in EuropeWashington’s plan to re-evaluate its posture in Europe could further undermine US nuclear deterrence if it strips out conventional. . .
NATO 3. 0: US Conventional Retrenchment and Nuclear Deterrence in EuropeWashington’s plan to re-evaluate its posture in Europe could further undermine US nuclear deterrence if it strips out conventional presence. At last week’s NATO Defence Ministerial, US Secretary of Defense Pete HegsethannouncedWashington would be undertaking a six-month review of US posture in Europe. The review, according to Hegseth, will ensure Europe takes primary responsibility for its defence – including through reductions in US annual NATO dues should European allies fail to meet defence spending targets. The announcement further advances Trump’s clearly stated objective of reducing US contributions to Europe’s conventional defence. At the same time, Washington has been keen to draw a distinction between its conventional and nuclear contributions to European security. Yet, this division is a somewhat artificial one. A reduced US conventional presence, coupled with disparaging – and, at times, outright belligerent – US rhetoric is fundamentally at odds with American claims that US extended nuclear deterrence in Europe remains unaffected. Extended Deterrence as a Consolation for Conventional RetrenchmentEven before Hegseth’s announcement of the ‘NATO 3. 0 review’, the Trump Administration had made clear that the US will play a reduced role in European conventional defence going forward. While highlighting the continued importance of Europe to US security, the 2025National Security Strategynoted that US policy will be to enable ‘Europe to stand on its own two feet . . . including by taking primary responsibility for its own defense’. The Pentagon had previouslyreportedly set 2027as the deadline for Europe to assume majority responsibility for NATO’s conventional defence. Hegseth’s latest pronouncements of a six-month review appear to align with that timeline. In early May, the USannouncedthe planned withdrawal of 5,000 American troops from Germany and thecancellationof the expected deployment of a Multi-Domain Task Force (MDTF) long-range fires battalion, apparently in response to German criticism of Trump’s policy towards Iran. A few weeks later, the Pentagonconfirmedit would be cancelling the rotational deployment of 4,000 US military personnel to Eastern Europe. Since then, Trumphas saidUS personnel deployments to Europe would be reduced further still. More recently, the UStoldEuropean allies it would be significantly reducing the number of fighter jets, maritime surveillance aircraft, aerial refuelling platforms, bombers, submarines and aircraft carriers allocated to NATO. As the Chinese threat to US interests in Asia continues to grow – and in light ofdepleting US weapons inventoriesas a result of Trump’s misadventure in the Middle East – any further US conventional withdrawals from Europe should not come as a surprise. Click here for the full press releaseTags:administrationAmericanAsiachineseclickConsolationConventionaldefencedéfenseDeterrenceDomaineastEuropaEuropeEuropeanHegsethNATOOTANpentagonretrenchmenttrumpwashington