Since the beginning of the conflict in the Middle East, Donald Trump has criticized NATO members for their lack of support, adding to the American President’s ongoing critique of the Atlantic alliance.
Donald Trump has been vocal in his reproach towards NATO, expressing frustration over its members’ limited military spending, lamenting their restraint in the Iran conflict, labeling it a “paper tiger,” and questioning its future, urging Europeans to take more responsibility for their own security.
Earlier this month, the White House tenant expressed intentions to reduce the presence of American troops in Germany even further, following an announcement of the withdrawal of 5,000 troops within a year. This concrete move reflects Washington’s increasing disinterest in European security, preoccupied by the war in Iran and the growing threat of China.
NATO, more than a military alliance
Despite Donald Trump’s criticisms, the United States remains a NATO member. The President, despite his vehement criticism, benefits economically from the military alliance, even though the American contribution to NATO’s budget is around 15%.
Beyond the military and security aspect regularly mentioned in this debate, American involvement in the organization also holds an economic dimension. A US withdrawal from NATO would come at a significant cost to Washington, despite the expenses tied to its Atlantic alliance membership.
In the event of a divorce with NATO, Washington risks losing billions of dollars in trade, supply chain integration, and institutional trust, as highlighted by a study from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CESI) published on April 22. Authors emphasize that NATO serves a purpose beyond security guarantees, promoting deep economic integration.
>”It is a long-term economic asset,” they concluded.
“Economic gains are significant, lasting, and, in many cases, effectively self-sustaining compared to the cost of membership. As the hub of the alliance, the United States has disproportionately benefited from this economic integration and would endure some of the heaviest losses in case of alliance dissolution,” they ventured.
Being a NATO member, a guarantee of “confidence”
In numerical terms, what does this mean? Two researchers from the University of Westminster, Karen Jackson and Oleksandr Shepotylo, estimated in December 2024 that “NATO membership increases bilateral trade between its members by 12 to 27% in the long run.” This range was calculated based on over 5,500 goods and accounts for the EU membership of most of NATO’s 32 members.
So how does a military alliance influence commercial exchanges among its members? The CESI identifies various mechanisms such as “reducing uncertainty and institutional trust” and interoperability through hundreds of NATO standardization agreements.
>”It is thanks to this that a Danish F-35 can be maintained at a Polish air base with American components,” illustrate the study authors.
This common economic ecosystem extends beyond the defense world, with “implications on civil industry.”
Europe, the American forward base to the Middle East
Apart from the economic consequences, what would happen to the 86,000 American soldiers stationed in Europe if Washington were to exit NATO? From Iceland to Spain, and England to Turkey, American military presence is dispersed throughout the European continent via air, maritime, and land bases.
One of the most well-known is located at Ramstein in western Germany, housing 54,000 civilians and military personnel, the highest concentration of American citizens outside the US. Recently, it served as a logistical platform for American deployments in the Middle East.
These bases hold strategic importance for the Pentagon in each of its military interventions in the region. Activity increased during strikes in Iran. In western England, residents of Kempsford could observe the back and forth movements of American bombers during the 39 days of strikes against the Mullahs regime.
In practice, it is unlikely that the US will leave NATO. Donald Trump would need the consent of two-thirds of the senators, which seems improbable given the current configuration, or through the adoption of a separate law in Congress. Before that, the President must consult the two Foreign Affairs committees and notify them six months before any deliberation.
If Donald Trump were to reach the end of the legislative process, the departure from the military alliance would be effective one year later. But for now, his mere statements or publications on Truth Social are sufficient to shake NATO. The American position at the upcoming summit of the Atlantic Alliance, scheduled for early July in Ankara, will be closely monitored.
