Trans-Atlantic relationship reveals cracks

Editor's note: Amid shifting global geopolitics in recent decades, the trans-Atlantic bond is being reshaped. China Daily will present a special series to examine these shifts and their long-term implications.

The trans-Atlantic alliance is facing growing uncertainty and increasingly pressing defense and security-centric challenges in recent years. While Washington has doubled down on its "America First" policy, it has simultaneously demanded that Europe shoulder greater defense responsibilities and called into question the sovereign interests and security of its European allies, analysts said.

Divisions between the United States and Europe over defense burdens, security guarantees and collective defense have hit the headlines from time to time, putting severe strain on the alliance formed after World War II, they said.

By seeking to shift more of the financial and defense-related burdens onto its European allies while reevaluating its own security commitments, the US is fueling growing doubts in Europe over the credibility of its security guarantees and the future of the NATO alliance, even as NATO's institutional framework remains intact, they said.

In a recent case, US President Donald Trump reiterated on July 31 that he had not given up on his ambition to bring Greenland under US control, predicting in an interview with Real America's Voice News that the Arctic island would come under US "operational control" before the end of his term.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said at last month's NATO summit in Ankara that her nation was ready to defend every inch of territory in the military alliance, "including our own".

Zhao Jizhou, associate research fellow at the Institute of European Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and board member of the Chinese Society of World Politics Studies, said the US push to annex Greenland has exposed deep cracks in NATO's principle of collective defense, while further eroding the mutual trust that underpins the alliance.

"Article 5 of the NATO treaty enshrines the principle of collective defense, while Article 4 calls for consultations when the territorial integrity, political independence or security of a member state is threatened. Yet, the US, as NATO's most powerful member, has made territorial claims over fellow member Denmark, undermining the political foundation of mutual trust and solidarity within the alliance," Zhao said.

If a NATO member's territorial claims against another member are effectively "legitimized", the moral and political foundations of the trans-Atlantic alliance as a collective defense organization could be severely weakened, if not fundamentally undermined, he said.

Rules-based order eroded

"It undermines the authority of international law, erodes the postwar rules-based international order and lays bare the colonialist logic that 'might makes right'," he said.

In recent years, the US has repeatedly urged NATO members to boost their defense spending and assume greater responsibility for Europe's own security. At the NATO summit in Ankara in July, Trump urged the members to meet the alliance's 5 percent of GDP defense spending target, arguing that European allies had long relied too heavily on the US for their security.

The US president has repeatedly threatened to withdraw from NATO if member states fail to meet their spending commitments. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has also linked higher defense spending by allies to faster access to US-made weapons, according to Politico, which said the US is "turning NATO into a cash machine".

"The move exposes Washington's bullying logic of turning NATO, a trans-Atlantic collective security alliance, into a vehicle for advancing US commercial interests. For European countries, this amounts to a double burden, putting them under both financial pressure and institutional pressure within the alliance," Zhao said.

"At its core, the trans-Atlantic defense relationship is characterized by a highly asymmetrical distribution of power, with the United States playing the dominant role," said Gao Jian, director of the European Think Tank Research Center at Shanghai International Studies University.

Within NATO, the sovereignty of smaller member states risks becoming conditional, with their interests subordinated to the security priorities and geopolitical strategies of major powers, namely the US, he said.

"Such a dynamic bears the hallmarks of neo-imperialism, reducing European allies to strategic dependents that can be pressured, traded off or even sacrificed at will, while running counter to the fundamental principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and noninterference in internal affairs," Gao said.

Diverging threat perceptions and security priorities among NATO members are likely to deepen divisions within the alliance, making consensus more difficult to achieve and prompting adjustments to the trans-Atlantic security framework, experts said.

"While the US is increasingly focused on global strategic competition and preserving its hegemonic position, Europe is more concerned with its immediate security needs and regional stability. The widening gap in their threat perceptions and strategic priorities is making it increasingly difficult for Washington and its European allies to maintain effective strategic coordination," Zhao said.

He said the US favors unilateral action and a more pragmatic approach to crisis management, while Europe places greater emphasis on multilateralism, consultation and negotiation. Such differences are likely to create growing friction over NATO decision-making and make it more difficult for the alliance to forge a unified response to future crises.

"In Washington's eyes, the distinction between allies and rivals has become increasingly blurred, while Europe is increasingly treated as a source of strategic and economic interests to be leveraged when convenient and sacrificed when necessary," Gao said.