European leaders are increasingly debating whether the continent could defend itself without U.S. military support — a question once considered theoretical but now gaining urgency amid political uncertainty in Washington.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte dismissed the idea this week while addressing members of the European Parliament, saying Europe cannot defend itself without the United States and warning that replacing U.S. military capabilities, including nuclear deterrence, would require defense spending to double.
“If anyone thinks that Europe can defend itself without the U.S., keep on dreaming,” Rutte said, adding that such ambitions would come at enormous cost.
His remarks drew sharp reactions from several European officials, who argued that Europe must take greater responsibility for its own security. France’s foreign minister said Europeans “can and must” assume more control over defense, describing this as the European pillar of NATO. Spain’s foreign minister went further, calling for the creation of a European army, while acknowledging that such a force could not be built overnight.
The idea of a European army has long divided policymakers. Supporters see it as a bold step toward strategic autonomy, while critics argue it lacks clarity over command, scope and purpose. Defense analysts note that the concept often remains vague enough to avoid hard decisions about structure and authority.
Despite public disagreements, there is broad consensus that European NATO members need to increase their military capabilities. European leaders have pledged to raise defense spending to 5% of national income by 2035, and the European Union has launched an €800 billion defense investment plan aimed at boosting production and readiness.
Still, officials acknowledge that achieving true independence from U.S. military support would take years. Former NATO officials say Europe is moving in the right direction but must sustain investment and focus on acquiring critical capabilities that are currently dominated by the United States, including intelligence, satellite systems, long-range missiles, airlift capacity and missile defense.
Military planners have warned that Europe should have credible deterrence in place by 2030, particularly in light of intelligence assessments suggesting a possible future threat from Russia. While that timeline is considered extremely tight, experts say meaningful progress could be made by then, even if full autonomy remains unrealistic.
Uncertainty about U.S. commitment has intensified amid mixed signals from Washington, including wavering support for Ukraine and controversial rhetoric about NATO allies. Some European officials remain confident that the U.S. would honor NATO’s collective defense clause, citing America’s strategic benefits from the alliance, especially in the Arctic.
Others are less certain. Defense analysts say trust in U.S. security guarantees has eroded, forcing Europe to reconsider long-standing assumptions. Current European defense planning still relies heavily on NATO frameworks that presume substantial U.S. involvement, raising concerns that increased spending may not actually reduce dependence on American forces.
Fragmentation remains a major obstacle. European countries operate a wide array of incompatible weapons systems, creating logistical challenges and inefficiencies. Officials note that Europe fields multiple types of tanks, artillery systems and aircraft, compared with far greater standardization in the U.S. military. Major joint projects have also faced delays and political disputes, fueling doubts about Europe’s ability to coordinate large-scale defense initiatives.
Some experts argue that Europe’s problem is not simply a lack of money, but a lack of strategic clarity. Rather than attempting to replicate every U.S. capability, they say Europe must define its own defense priorities — including how to approach nuclear deterrence and protect interests from the Arctic to the Indo-Pacific — and invest in systems that are faster, cheaper and better aligned with those goals.
Without a clear vision, analysts warn, Europe risks spending vast sums while remaining dependent on the United States for the most critical elements of its security.
