“We no longer ‘need,’ or desire, the Nato Countries’ assistance,” President Trump posted on Truth Social last week, “WE NEVER DID!” Trump’s outburst sprang from ire over our NATO allies’ refusal to join US efforts to open the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic waterway controlling transit of about 20% of the world’s oil.
The post reflects Trump’s long-held frustrationwith our European partners for not pulling their weight and appears to confirm his conviction that “they will do nothing for us, in particular, in a time of need.”
In the days that followed, Euroloser politicians have ranged from politely declining to blunt refusals to outright condemnation of American attacks on Iran.
These witless appeasers ignore that Iran’s Islamist regime and terrorist proxies have for decades assailed them, and us, with lethal attacks, arguably a trigger for NATO’s mutual defense provisions.
They seem bizarrely oblivious to their nations’ heavy dependency on imported oil and sensitivity to hikes in international energy prices.
The Europeans also appear to have forgotten that Iran is a major strategic partner of Russia, which it has actively assisted with equipment and intelligence as Putin’s armies ravage Ukraine even while Russia reaps an unexpected windfall — possibly as much as $5 billion this month alone — from the sudden surge in oil prices.
Worst of all, these clowns have no idea how unimportant they ultimately are to the efforts of a US military that has already sunk Iran’s navy, decimated its air force, and deployed two aircraft carrier battle groups near the Persian Gulf, with nine more on active duty elsewhere and hundreds of aircraft on the ground across the Middle East.
As Trump suggested on Wednesday, an alienated U.S. could abandon responsibility for Hormuz’s long-term security and leave it a permanent problem for our inept and recalcitrant allies.
Nevertheless, the lack of any helping gesture has touched a nerve in Washington. Trump called Europe’s refusal to assist our opening Hormuz a “foolish mistake” and added that “it will be very bad for the future of NATO.”
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham has said that Europe’s attitude “makes me second guess the value of these alliances” and warned of “wide and deep” consequences. War Secretary Pete Hegseth has dismissed the European allies as “ungrateful.”
The truth is the hapless Europeans need us much more than we need them and aren’t going anywhere. Geopolitically, and carrying 60% of NATO expenses, we are the only game in town.
Facing a Russian threat and global problems the Europeans can’t even begin to solve, integrating dozens of small national militaries into a comprehensive whole will take decades if it’s possible at all.
Even as China’s economic prowess fades, it remains a rapacious dictatorship with values alien to Europe and uses economic advantage to bend lesser countries to its will.
The most important military tech in European use is American-made and will long into the future require alliance-brokered deals for maintenance and replacement.
According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a full European decoupling from NATO would take at least 20 years and cost them a trillion dollars they don’t have.
The war in Ukraine is insolvable without US participation, and alienating Trump over Hormuz could diminish Washington’s already limited willingness to support Kyiv.
Less than nine months ago, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte memorably called Trump “Daddy,” adding in January that any European who thinks the continent doesn’t need the US should “keep on dreaming.”
At last month’s Munich Security Conference, European leaders rose in a standing ovation to greet Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s emphasis on shared trans-Atlantic values and strategic interests.
Cynical European leaders may have concluded that the US will open Hormuz on its own, without their having to contribute.
That freeloading attitude has been the problem all along, but cracks in their reasoning are already visible. Britain is backpedaling its refusal to get involved, saying it may deploy drones and other unmanned weapons systems to help open Hormuz.
London has also reportedly dispatched a military mission to Washington to discuss further cooperation. Estonia has announced readiness to talk cooperation upon Trump’s request.
Finland’s President Alexander Stubb said “countries that have the capacity and the will to help the United States will do that and should do that.”
Despite the Greenland issue, Denmark’s Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said “it’s wise to keep an open mind on whether Europe . . . in some way can contribute” to aiding American efforts. On Thursday, after natural gas prices also spiked, the British government released a statement endorsed by France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Japan condemning Iran’s closure of Hormuz and signaling “readiness to contribute to appropriate efforts” to reopen the strait.”
The Europeans may not like it, but NATO is here to stay, and they are the junior partners in it.
Paul du Quenoy is President of the Palm Beach Freedom Institute.
The post Why European weakness will ensure NATO’s survival in the long run appeared first on New York Post.
