Anatomy of Trump’s Thinking on NATO… and on the EU

Over the past two decades, history has undergone several brutal accelerations that Europeans neither anticipated nor understood in time, leaving them frozen in shock. The most recent of these dramas is the rupture of the transatlantic relationship, officially sealed – for anyone who still had doubts – on 4 December 2025. By publishing a new National Security Strategy at the end of the year, Donald Trump has sent several messages to its so-called Atlantic partners. Some are ideological in nature, centred on themes such as immigration or national identity. Others are far more concrete and operational: together, they amount to a genuine roadmap.

In the geopolitical and strategic domains, the message sent to the Old Continent is crystal clear, and it is twofold. First, Europeans must “Europeanise NATO”. Second, they must set the European Union (EU) aside – and, if possible, dissolve it. These two injunctions are closely interlinked. It would be a mistake to analyse them in isolation.

Europeanising NATO

The idea of Europeanising NATO does not, in fact, originate in Washington. It first took shape in Brussels, before being subtly hijacked by the current occupant of the White House. To understand what the US President means by the Europeanisation of NATO, we must distinguish this concept from an earlier, equally European notion: that of the European pillar of NATO.

Until quite recently, the notion of a European pillar of NATO did not factor in the possibility of US disengagement. Europeans were simply asking themselves how they could strengthen their own military capabilities so as to contribute more effectively to the Alliance and thereby rebalance the sharing of the security burden with the United States. At root, they reasoned, any institution that is to rest on solid foundations needs pillars of comparable size. The challenge, therefore, was to bring European efforts up to a level closer to that of the United States.

Donald Trump’s arrival in power overturned this paradigm and forced Europeans to rewrite their strategic software. Fearing that the United States might disengage completely from the continent, they developed the concept of the “Europeanisation” of NATO in the hope of keeping Washington on board. This notion goes beyond a simple rebalancing of roles between Europeans and Americans: it assumes that the forces deployed within the Alliance would be predominantly European, while still keeping the United States at the heart of the NATO architecture.

Donald Trump has adopted this idea, while adding a non-trivial condition. In his view, Europe must certainly relearn how to defend itself, but it must do so without any political ambition of integration or strategic autonomy. Europeans are thus invited to remain within an Alliance from which the United States intends to hold itself at arm’s length, while continuing to supervise it. This posture would allow Washington to retain control over the rearmament of the continent, which is expected to proceed mainly through the purchase of American military systems. In exchange, the United States would pledge not to abandon the Alliance and to support Europeans in the event of conflict, applying the principle of “leading from behind”, as already practised in Libya.

Annihilating the EU

In this scheme, the European Union has no place. It is told to step back, if not to disappear from the equation altogether. Over the past few years, the EU has had the temerity to sketch out a new industrial policy with a strategic, interventionist and protectionist bent, capable of competing with American firms in the military and dual-use sectors. This policy, which concerns defence first and foremost, is admittedly still embryonic and incomplete, yet it could prove promising. At least, it marks an important milestone in the long and troubled history of European integration and in the quest for strategic autonomy.

By attacking the European Union head-on while simultaneously calling for the Europeanisation of NATO, Donald Trump is seeking to block this dynamic. He wants Europeans to cooperate within the framework of the Alliance precisely so that they do not integrate politically within the EU.

What do the EU Member States really want?

For their part, most European capitals do not view this option entirely unfavourably. They have always had a dual attitude towards the integration process: they praise it by day and fear it by night, especially when it touches on the defence sector. The Europeanisation of NATO therefore appears to them as a convenient solution, since it would allow them to cooperate militarily within NATO’s intergovernmental framework, while bypassing the EU and continuing to nurture the illusion of national sovereignty. Through this approach, however, what they would in fact be nurturing is the continued sovereignty of the United States over their continent.