Soldiers of armored infantry battalion Panzergrenadierbataillon 122 of the Bundeswehr, the German armed forces, in Lithuania | Johannes Simon/Getty Images

Opinion

If Europe tries to protect the alliance only by buying American commitment through increased defense spending, it will fail.

By Jean-Marie Guhenno

2/11/17, 4:13 AM CET

Updated 2/11/17, 2:00 PM CET

Europeans have every reason to worry about U.S. President Donald Trump. He has declared NATO obsolete. Hes spoken more glowingly about Russian President Vladimir Putin than about most WesternEuropean leaders. And hes suggested he will apply his transactional vision of diplomacy to his countrys alliances. A president who has unabashedly made America First his guiding principleis telling Europeans Americas commitment to themwill depend on their willingness to pay for it.

The Continents leaders should listen carefully. For too long, European countries have not been serious enough about their own defense; most spend much less than the 2 percentof GDP goal set by NATO. If they do not change course, a president who has little understanding of soft power and, in his own words, only respects strength, will not take them seriously.

A European security landscape defined in bilateral talks between Russia and the U.S. is a serious possibility, one that would be terrible news for the Continent. Trump might care most about fighting Islamic terrorism; for Russia, the priority remains dividing Europe to gain the upper hand.

If Europes only response is to buy American commitment through increased defense spending as NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg has indicated alliance members should do it will fail. NATO cannot sustain itself as a political alliance if it is guided by monetarytransactions. Its European members must show unity of purpose and vision: The time has come to create a European pillar of NATO.

* * *

Today, there is no shared vision of what NATO stands for, and apparently little interest in the White House for the principles that gave substance to the NATO security commitment during the last 67 years. The transatlantic solidarity defined by Article 5 of NATOs founding treatyis only credible if it is underpinned by a set of shared values.

NATO is about North Americasengagement in Europe, and Europeans, working with Canada, must take the initiative in proposing a vision adapted to the 21st century. Otherwise, they run the risk that a president who has little time for the Continent will see his European allies simply asadjuncts to an America First strategy and blatantly ignore their interests.

Germany and France, whose military capacities are increasingly compatible and complementary, should take the lead once elections in bothcountries have taken place.

The idea of a European pillar is not new, but was deemed unnecessary for many years because the alliances members shareda solidconsensuson its functions. As a proposal, apillarnow makes sense in terms of realpolitik. With a U.S. president who appears more than happy to play nations against one another, European countriesare unlikelyto make themselves heard unless they can present a coherent, united position.

The move wouldalso benefit intra-European political dynamics. Europeans are unlikely to support increased defense spending if it is perceivedsimply as aresponse to American bullyingand support for Washingtons somewhat incoherent policies. Increased effort must come with a renewed sense of political ownership for NATOs European members.A stronger EU that regains political momentum by making its own security a political priority, is an indispensable partner to a strong NATO.

The specifics of a more integrated effort, whether aEuropean headquartersor an expanded role for the European Defense Agency, or ideas to implement the EU global strategy in the area of security and defense as agreed by EU member countriesin November, should be discussed between EU nations.

National governments will want to retain a central role in matters of national security, butthe European institutions can help coordinate the effort and give it a broader European dimension.

* * *

A European pillar will first have to decide on its membership. Germany and France, whose military capacities are increasingly compatible and complementary, should take the lead once elections in bothcountries have taken place.

A caucus needs to emerge within NATO. It should include the six founding members of the EU, as well asmore recent members, which could agree on two founding principles: that the emergence of a European pillar is made necessary by the changed strategic landscape; and that a European pillar should be conceived as a means to strengthen NATO, not as an alternative to it. In fact, one of its key goalswill be to keep the U.S. engaged.

That core group should in time be opened to other members of the EU and should establish close consultation mechanisms with EU non-NATO members, such as Sweden, and with NATO nonEU members, such as Norway and Turkey.

Polish soldiers pose during a welcome of U.S. troops in Zagan, Poland | Natalia Dobryszycka/AFP via Getty Images

An informal political approach is probably the only viable path to this European pillar, since a formal institutional approach would likely stall veryquickly. A formal arrangement withTurkey, for example, will remain difficultuntil its problems with the bloc the question of Cyprus reunification remains a sore point are solved.

And within theEU, serious differences have emerged on what role the Unionshould play in its own defense. Separated from the question of EU membership, a European pillar within NATO could bring countries with varying degrees of EU adherence into the fold. TheUnited Kingdom one of the Continents most important military powers for example, is about to leave the EUbut couldfind its strategic interests best served by a close relationship with the new group.

In an era of rising nationalism, creating a European pillar ofNATO may sound ambitious. But opinion polls show that Europeans, while critical of many aspects of the EU, considerdefense to be an area that warrants more, rather than less, cooperation. The EU will not get out of its present malaise by renouncing its ambitions. On the contrary, it needs to be more ambitious if it wants to respond to the security concerns of its citizens. The exceptional circumstances confronting Europe require an exceptional response.

Jean-Marie Guhenno is president andCEO of International Crisis Group, the independent conflict prevention organization.

Continued here:

Why NATO needs a European pillar POLITICO - POLITICO.eu