Will the U.S. Leave NATO? Officials Dismiss Growing Doubts

This has happened before; we have declared that NATO is dead or dying. Recently, Mike Lee, a Republican member of the U.S. Senate, wrote on the social media platform X: 'The time has come to leave NATO and the United Nations.' Elon Musk, the world's richest person and a close ally of the U.S. President, also responded very briefly: 'I agree.' Although officials in Brussels (NATO headquarters) and elsewhere say that Elon Musk's political opinions shared on his social media do not necessarily dictate U.S. policy, observers speak of his access to Donald Trump and his informal influence in specific conservative circles in Washington. However, NATO officials have surprisingly maintained their composure so far, and their response to whether the collapse of this military alliance is imminent has been a firm 'no'; they have provided two reasons: the difference between words and actions, and the difference between NATO allies and NATO applicants, especially Ukraine. Trump once again criticized Zelensky; Europe seeks to boost defense capabilities. Let's address the first reason (the difference between words and actions); Donald Trump emphasized his commitment to 'NATO Article 5' during a meeting with Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister of the UK, just last week; an article under which a military attack on one NATO member is considered an attack on all members. Prior to him, Pete Hegseth, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, had reiterated this view several times during public and private sessions at the NATO Defense Ministers' meeting in Brussels. According to the Europe editor at Radio Free Europe, although Pete Hegseth firmly insisted that European allies must significantly increase their defense budgets, every NATO official I spoke with described the discussions as constructive. One NATO ambassador told the Europe editor at Radio Free Europe: 'He [Mr. Hegseth] did not leave the room at all, listened, asked questions, and took notes; this behavior is not that of an ally on the verge of leaving.' Thus, NATO diplomats continue to speculate. A senior NATO official told Radio Free Europe: 'We need to decode the meaning of all this. But we have learned to ignore the noise and look at actions. This is a kind of 'strategic patience' that we must practice.' The challenges of Trump; can Europe have an independent defense strategy? Ukraine, however, is a different matter. According to one NATO ambassador's view, the U.S. approach toward Ukraine has changed, but it has not changed regarding NATO; 'They have been very tough on Ukraine but are committed to NATO.' A change in tone regarding Volodymyr Zelensky is a clear indicator, but Britain's new role in coordinating arms deliveries to Ukraine is also an indicator. It is also evident that Ukraine will not join NATO anytime soon (in fact, it was the Biden administration that prevented Kyiv's membership during NATO leaders' meetings, calming some Western European countries, but the new U.S. administration is clearer about Ukraine's non-membership in NATO). What Eastern NATO countries are now asking is whether U.S. forces will be stationed there or not. Currently, the answer is yes; although many confirm this concern that the level of U.S. forces in Europe may soon be reviewed. But if Russia attacks these countries, will U.S. forces come to their aid? The prevailing belief is yes. However, Article 5 of the NATO treaty depends on the belief of members and also on enemies regarding its implementation. As one Eastern European official puts it: 'It's like Schrödinger's cat, both alive and dead states exist until the box is opened. In the case of NATO, until Article 5 is tested in practice, we really do not know.' Trump: Forget about Ukraine joining NATO.