[SS from essay by Giovanna De Maio, Policy Adviser on U.S. and Transatlantic Relations at the Policy Planning Unit of the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Célia Belin, Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations and the head of its Paris office.]
In a speech in Munich in February, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris affirmed that Washington’s commitment to its NATO allies is “ironclad.” Now the Democratic presidential nominee, Harris is largely expected to maintain President Joe Biden’s support for Ukraine and close ties with European partners if she succeeds him in the top job. Her Republican rival, Donald Trump, meanwhile, declared in February that Russia could do “whatever the hell they wanted” to NATO members that do not spend enough on defense, reminding Europeans that he values neither NATO nor U.S. alliances.
After November’s election, one of two very different views of the United States’ obligations in Europe will hold sway in Washington. Across the Atlantic, Europeans are frantically considering the implications of each outcome, hoping to find a magic formula for success with either.
Best way to handle it? Meet the 2% defense spending agreement. An alliance is a MUTUAL agreement. America and a few other countries didn’t sign on just to be the military protection for other countries who don’t spend on defense and have little skin in the game.
2 comments
[SS from essay by Giovanna De Maio, Policy Adviser on U.S. and Transatlantic Relations at the Policy Planning Unit of the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Célia Belin, Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations and the head of its Paris office.]
In a speech in Munich in February, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris affirmed that Washington’s commitment to its NATO allies is “ironclad.” Now the Democratic presidential nominee, Harris is largely expected to maintain President Joe Biden’s support for Ukraine and close ties with European partners if she succeeds him in the top job. Her Republican rival, Donald Trump, meanwhile, declared in February that Russia could do “whatever the hell they wanted” to NATO members that do not spend enough on defense, reminding Europeans that he values neither NATO nor U.S. alliances.
After November’s election, one of two very different views of the United States’ obligations in Europe will hold sway in Washington. Across the Atlantic, Europeans are frantically considering the implications of each outcome, hoping to find a magic formula for success with either.
Best way to handle it? Meet the 2% defense spending agreement. An alliance is a MUTUAL agreement. America and a few other countries didn’t sign on just to be the military protection for other countries who don’t spend on defense and have little skin in the game.