Day after NATO Ends

Despite being discussed many times, NATO survives. Another fox, however, has entered the chicken dump, and it has encountered the typical European response to danger - a strong clucky and feathering.

The fox in question is French President Emmanuel Macron, who recently described it NATO was experiencing a type of “brain death”. No one should approve that choice of words or Macron's new passion for dialogue with Russian President Vladimir Putin (I, for myself, do not approve) to understand the momentum of his argument. A profound change in US strategic priorities under President Donald Trump requires Europeans to review long-standing assumptions of their collective protection.

This is not the first time NATO seems hard to stand. Many had reached the same conclusion before 2014, when the alliance had little to concentrate beyond the mission in Afghanistan. When Russia annexed Crime and brought war to eastern Ukraine, it gave a new life to NATO.

Then came Trump, whose administration has removed support for Europe, abandoned the American leadership within the rule-based international system and followed a nationalist, protectionist and uniform foreign policy. Trump has declared it NATO <x0) outdated”

The result is that Europe must take care of itself for the first time since the end of World War II. However, after so many years of strategic dependence on the United States, Europe is unprepared not only in material terms but also in psychological terms about today's harsh geopolitical realities. This is nowhere more true than in Germany.

NATO's future is more uncertain now than at any time in its history. Shortly after 1989, few doubted that the alliance would still exist some 20 years later. But today, questions about her future stem not only from Washington but also from Paris. NATO survival can no longer be taken for granted, and Europeans cannot wait 20 years to figure out what should come next.

Between the nationalist turn of America, increasing China's credibility and the ongoing digital revolution, Europe has no choice but to become a separate power. This way, Macro's got a crush on him. But Europeans should not create illusions about what defence autonomy would require. For the European Union, which has seen itself more as an economic power and as a military power, it means a deep break with the status quo.

To be sure, NATO still exists, and there are still American troops deployed in Europe. But the operational word is “acoma”. Now that traditional institutions and transatlantic security commitments have been questioned, the alliance's expansion has become less a “if” than “, when”. When will Trump finally decide it's time to cancel all of this? For Europeans, it would be foolish to sit back and wait for their destiny to come from heaven.

Macron understands this, while Germany, as usual, is simply serving its old commitments, promising to increase its defence expenses, but making very little progress. Macron realizes that breaking Europe's defence after withdrawing American troops would be much tougher than some expect. It would unfold, not as a gradual transition, hardly visible, but as an unexpected break.

If Europe wants to prevent or at least delay that outcome, it should make substantial investments in its military and expand its capabilities to a massive extent. In other words, she must act as if the break-up has already occurred.

For most of its modern history, Europe has had to face two challenges: a turbulent centre (Germany) and a vulnerable east wing (Russia and now China), which has always been open to geopolitical terms. From its foundation. NATO has served as a solution to both these problems.

As someone looks farther east inside NATO and the EU, it faces an increasing fear of security among member states. This is not surprising, given the geographical proximity of these countries with Russia and the long history of Russian imperialism, manifested recently in the armed annexation by Russia of Crime and the war in eastern Ukraine. For these countries beginning with Poland and the Baltic countries ? integration of America into European protection through NATO is necessary.

Given the geopolitical risks of the eastern wing of Europe, NATO guarantees a necessary form of security, even promotes solidarity and unity within the EU, demanding that each member contribute its share fairly to a greater good. Trump's nationalist shift under the motto “The America of pre” has suddenly forced Europe to face the issue of its sovereignty, which means becoming an independent technological power with the ability to act decisively as a united front. The EU would never have done so by its own will. Trump, whatever its purpose, is forcing Europe to recreate itself. For saving NATO, the EU must act as if the alliance had already disappeared. /Project Syndicate/In Albanian by: BIRN/