The Future of NATO Under the Trump Administration

How Trump’s foreign policy and Europe’s defense response could redefine NATO’s future.

Since its founding in 1949 during the Cold War, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has provided collective defense and security for most of Europe, Canada, and the United States. Now, the alliance’s spending and dynamics are becoming uncertain, as political tensions rise and leaders like President Donald Trump remain in power. Although NATO is considered one of the most powerful military alliances in the world, cracks in the dominant foundation have been running increasingly deep. As Trump undermines core beliefs of trust and unity, NATO’s biggest threat may come from within.

United States President Donald Trump has expressed controversial opinions about NATO since his presidency in 2017. The U.S. is a vital contributor to NATO: thousands of American soldiers are deployed across Europe, and 15% of NATO’s annual common budget of $3.5 billion comes from the United States.

Trump publicly stated, “It’s costing us too much money, and frankly, they have to put up more money. They’re going to have to put some up, also. We’re paying disproportionately, it’s too much, and frankly, it’s a different world than it was when we originally conceived of the idea and everybody got together.” Trump demanded that NATO members allocate at least five percent of their GDP to defense spending, far exceeding the alliance’s agreed benchmark of two percent.

The President went on to say, “If they don’t pay, I’m not going to defend them.” By not defending a fellow NATO country, Trump contradicts a core principle, Article 5, which states that an attack against one NATO member is an attack against all members. Other important members of Congress have also shown skepticism about NATO, like Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.

This sentiment echoes a larger shift within the Republican Party toward isolationism. In his 2024 book The War on Warriors, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth writes, “Why should America, the European ’emergency contact number’ for the past century, listen to self-righteous and impotent nations asking us to honor outdated and one-sided defense arrangements they no longer live up to? Maybe if NATO countries actually ponied up for their own defense—but they don’t. They just yell about the rules while gutting their militaries and yelling at America for help.”

Although the U.S. cannot withdraw from NATO without a congressional vote and Senate majority, it has still moved to scale back support. As a result, questions of how Europe will manage the alliance’s defense and spending responsibilities are emerging. According to Bloomberg, NATO recently requested that Canada and European countries increase their weapon stockpiles by 30%.

NATO’s goal is to be prepared in the event that the U.S. chooses to leave the alliance. European countries like Germany, France, and Poland have increased their defense spending in response. Euronews reports that Polish President Andrzej Duda proposed to include a provision in the Polish Constitution guaranteeing that the eastern European country will permanently allocate a minimum of 4% of its GDP for defence and security. French President Emmanuel Macron has suggested a 3.5% increase in military spending, and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has proposed a billion-dollar fund for their armed forces.

A major factor contributing to NATO’s internal tensions is the U.S.’s shifting stance on Ukraine and the disruption caused by Trump’s foreign policy decisions during his presidency. For one, he has suspended military assistance to Ukraine, preferring to negotiate with Vladimir Putin. Trump has also declared that it would be unlikely to restore Ukraine to its 2014 borders and stated Ukraine should not be part of NATO. The U.S. also sided with Russia in a United Nations attempt to condemn Russia for the Russo-Ukrainian war. 

Kate Mackintosh, Executive Director of UCLA’s Promise Institute Europe, who formerly worked in fields of international criminal justice and human rights, explains, “Trump’s approach to NATO solidarity has raised serious questions about the future of the alliance. Early signals of siding with Russia over Ukraine, open threats toward Greenland, and a general disinterest in strengthening ties with European allies suggest a deepening rift. NATO’s foundational principle—mutual defense under Article 5—was never designed to handle a scenario where one member might threaten another. This uncertainty, coupled with Trump’s overtures to Russia, leaves many wondering whether NATO’s days are numbered. For Ukraine, this ambiguity could be deeply destabilizing. A weakened or fractured NATO undermines the unified front that has been critical in supporting Ukraine’s resistance to Russian aggression.”

(Photograph: Business Post)

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, former U.S. President Donald Trump, and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

As geopolitical landscapes change and Trump continues to make decisions that affect the country’s international relations, the future of NATO remains unclear. European countries continue to raise military spending as the U.S. raises tariffs. Now more than ever, NATO relies on all of its members, especially the United States. As threats to security, such as Russia, arise, and as countries like China, North Korea, and Iran support them. Whether or not NATO remains closely tied to the U.S., the alliance’s relevance in an increasingly multipolar world is clearer than ever.