Ankara is a historical crossroads for Europe

On Saturday, the United States celebrated its 250th anniversary. For US President Donald Trump, this was an opportunity to reaffirm a key point of his global policy strategy – America First. The fact is, however, that the military and still economic dominance of the US in the world is paradoxically accompanied by the finding of a new, more isolationist identity, which also brings a gradual loss of trust among American allies.

Since the beginning of the year, it has been "thawing" practically every day. Suffice it to recall the indiscriminate pressure on Denmark to surrender to the US Greenland, or the conflict over the unwillingness of the Europeans to join the US operation against Iran, which brought about Trump's angry statement that NATO is just a "paper tiger". The final dot was Trump's statement that he would not attend the upcoming summit if it was not hosted by Turkish President Recep Tayip Erdogan.

It should be added that just at the moment of the "European rebellion" over Iran, the Pentagon announced that it would no longer provide some important military capabilities for the alliance: a whole group of aircraft carrier strikes, submarines capable of launching long-range missiles, patrol and refueling aircraft, and 50 F-16 and F-15 fighter jets.

There is probably no urgent threat that the US will immediately withdraw from NATO – the US Congress will not allow Trump to do so. However, it is clear that for the current US president, defending Europe is not a "sacred duty". And it can be expected that this will not be the case with his successors either.

The defence of Europe is also becoming a topic of discussion on the basis of the principle of transactional security. Europe must already pay for American weapons supplied to Ukraine.

For Europeans, the period of a kind of NATO 2.0 has actually begun, in which they must start relying more on their own military capabilities and capabilities. But it still depends heavily on the world's military superpower: in intelligence, air defense, strategic airlift, and, last but not least, nuclear deterrence.

In an interview with the Süddeutsche Zeitung, leading German military expert Christian Mölling soberly described the state in which NATO could function: the US will not disappear from it, but Europe will bear the main burden in the field of conventional weapons. There will be no break in relations, but a redistribution of responsibility for defence.

However, it must also be accompanied by an overall reassessment of the effectiveness of not only the European Union's defence but also its foreign and security policy.

For example, because spending five percent or perhaps more on defense in the event that the Americans continue to reduce their support for Europe may not be politically feasible. Especially when tectonic political changes may await the old continent, and not only after the presidential elections in France next April.

Europe thus faces a somewhat uncertain future.  

Miloš Balabán, Právo Daily