{"id":18292,"date":"2020-10-28T14:58:32","date_gmt":"2020-10-28T14:58:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/uncategorized\/2020\/10\/28\/america-enforcing-a-core-nato-pledge-does-not-mean-its-abandoning-allies\/"},"modified":"2026-08-20T16:11:48","modified_gmt":"2026-08-20T16:11:48","slug":"america-enforcing-a-core-nato-pledge-does-not-mean-its-abandoning-allies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/global\/europe\/2020\/10\/28\/america-enforcing-a-core-nato-pledge-does-not-mean-its-abandoning-allies\/","title":{"rendered":"America enforcing a core NATO pledge does not mean it\u2019s abandoning allies"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

As President Donald Trump\u2019s first term ends<\/a>, it\u2019s worth assessing how U.S. relations with NATO have fared over the past four years. Say what you will about the Trump administration and its foreign policy<\/a>, but NATO is an issue where the Trump administration has moved U.S. foreign policy in a positive direction, reflecting core American interests rather than holding on to a world order that grew stale when the Cold War ended 30 years ago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The latest dustup between the U.S. and Europe is instructive. Right now, European allies \u2014 particularly Germany \u2014 are unhappy because the White House plans to restation 11,900 troops from Germany. Of those troops, 5,600 would stay in Europe but leave Germany, and 6,400 would return back to the United States. Many of the troops who stay in Europe will likely be moved to Poland<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This coming move by the Trump administration has prompted widespread criticism. One popular commentator, Mark Cancian, called the move a waste of money<\/a>, citing the large cost of moving troops and their families to new bases with brand-new accommodations. Although Cancian agreed with building up troops in Poland, Cancian called the rationale for pulling troops out of Germany and bringing them back to the U.S. \u201cweak.\u201d Cancian correctly notes that the president\u2019s decision is motived by Germany being \u201cdelinquent\u201d on NATO defense commitments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

NATO rules require members to spend at least 2 percent<\/a> of gross domestic product on defense. Germany spends less than 1.3 percent of GDP on defense. Despite articles that make it seem<\/a> as if Germany is about to spend more, Germany has yet to increase defense spending. This was true before the coronavirus pandemic<\/a>, and it is especially true today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This isn\u2019t a petty issue. At NATO\u2019s core is the Article 5 pledge of collective defense: An attack on one NATO member will be met with a response by NATO\u2019s other members. But the bedrock of NATO\u2019s collective defense pledge is Article 3, which stipulates that each country will contribute to the collective defense. This includes not just the 2 percent of GDP requirement, but a requirement that a significant portion<\/a> of the spending be on heavy equipment and technology.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Germany is woefully delinquent, contributing almost 40 percent less than what it has pledged. The effects are highly noticeable. Several years ago, Germany had only four combat-ready jets. Germany has less than a third of the tanks it did in the 2000s. Of the tanks it has, less than half are ready or fit for action. Only 12 out of 50 Tiger helicopters<\/a> are up to shape. According to The Economist, \u201cat the end of [2017] none of the country\u2019s six submarines was at sea.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Germany is the starkest example, but this is a European problem<\/a>. Of NATO\u2019s 30 members, only 10<\/a> meet the commitment to spend 2 percent of their GDP on defense. If European countries assess that they don\u2019t need to spend much on defense, then we don\u2019t need to force them to buy more weapons \u2014 but nor should Americans be expected to shoulder the burden<\/a> of being Europe\u2019s front line of defense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

NATO was set up in part to safeguard Europe against the now-defunct Soviet Union. Today, Germany\u2019s economy is about 2.5 times that of Russia\u2019s, but Germany spends only $45 billion annually on defense while Russia spends about $80 billion. Russia\u2019s outspending is still a pittance relative to America\u2019s more than $700 billion spent on defense. Clearly, Germany\u2019s own government doesn\u2019t view Russia as a threat, as it struck another pipeline deal to be even more reliant on Russian energy.<\/p>\n\n\n\t