The barrage of attacks by US President Donald Trump on the European Union is forcing its leaders to confront the unthinkable: a future in which America is no longer their main security guarantor, and Europe must organize its own defense much faster than anyone could have imagined, Politico reports, writes UNN.

Details”In anticipation of a diminished American role, EU leaders are already testing a European-led security order,” the publication states. And it notes that many of the most important decisions regarding Ukraine are being developed in a loose “coalition of the willing” led by Great Britain and France, and also includes Germany.

“Meanwhile, EU politicians are exploring opportunities for deeper coordination through the UK-led Joint Expeditionary Force, or by pushing for a stronger ‘European pillar’ within NATO – an idea long supported by Paris and now gaining momentum in Berlin,” the publication writes.

A senior defense official from a medium-sized European country said that discussions about security guarantees for Ukraine with American officials have become “uncomfortable.” More importantly, according to the official, so have discussions about Article 5 – the clause in the NATO treaty that requires allies to come to each other’s defense if one is attacked.

The “uncertainty” about how the US would behave in the event of an attack on a frontline state is “simply too high,” the official said.

Open questionOther current and former security officials said that “the key question is no longer whether Europe will take primary responsibility for its defense and security, but when.”

The absence of US Secretary of State Marco Rubio from a recent meeting of NATO foreign ministers – something that has happened only a few times in the alliance’s history – caused concern among former EU and NATO officials. This raised concerns after his deputy, Christopher Landau, criticized EU countries for prioritizing their own defense industries instead of continuing to buy from the US.

Efforts to create new forums independent of Washington received a new impetus last week with the publication of the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy, the publication notes.

“The days when the United States supported the entire world order, like Atlas, are over,” the document states. “Wealthy, developed countries… must take primary responsibility for their regions.”

The document argues that in Europe, mass migration “is transforming the continent and creating conflicts.”

“If current trends continue, the continent will be unrecognizable in 20 years or less. Thus, it is far from obvious whether certain European countries will have a strong enough economy and army to remain reliable allies,” the strategy states.

If NATO allies become predominantly non-European, the document continues, “it is an open question whether they will view their place in the world or their alliance with the United States in the same way as those who signed the NATO charter.”

In an interview on Monday, Trump emphasized the idea that Europe, which is experiencing “mass migration,” is “decaying” and has no purpose. The bloc’s “weak” leaders simply “don’t know what to do,” he told Politico.

“The people who are coming in have a totally different ideology,” he added. “They’re going to be much weaker, and they’re going to be totally different.”

New European order

Faced with relentless attacks from the Trump administration, the European Union is quietly working to create new security guarantees in case NATO’s guarantees prove unreliable.

“The question is whether we need any additional security guarantees and institutional arrangements to be ready – in case Article 5 suddenly isn’t implemented,” said EU Defense Commissioner Andrius Kubilius in late November. Even so, “we must always count on Article 5,” he added.

“One of the legal bases for such a guarantee could be the EU’s common defense clause, Article 42.7, which emerged after the Kosovo war of the late 1990s, when then-French and British leaders Jacques Chirac and Tony Blair jointly insisted that Europe take defense into its own hands,” the publication states.

Kubilius, a former Prime Minister of Lithuania, added that he wants to use the next year to concretize the provisions in the clause to clearly define what actions countries will take to protect each other.

He pointed to recent comments by US Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker, who suggested that Germany should take over the top military position in NATO from the Americans. This comment “is a signal that the Americans are actually asking us to take care of European defense.”

US sets 2027 as deadline for Europe-led NATO defense – Reuters05.12.25, 15:05 • 3372 views

The era of “security guarantees” is overAs European military leaders and intelligence services warn that an attack from Russia could come as early as 2028, the traditional European attitude to defense – and reliance on the United States – is rapidly changing, the publication writes.

Until recently, Germany steadfastly supported US-led NATO. But under Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Berlin is now negotiating with Paris on how French nuclear deterrence capabilities can contribute to European security.

Germany cannot have its own nuclear weapons, but it is worth discussing their joint use with France and Britain – Merz09.03.25, 18:11 • 27152 views

At the same time, the publication notes, Merz is demonstrating a growing willingness to disagree with Washington on Ukraine and Europe’s security architecture. Some parts of the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy were “unacceptable,” the conservative leader said on Tuesday.

Merz called parts of the US security strategy “unacceptable” and sees no need for Americans to save democracy in Europe09.12.25, 14:46 • 2694 views

The document confirms Merz’s view that “we in Europe, and therefore in Germany, must become much more independent from the United States in security policy.”

This shift reflects a changing dynamic within the German security establishment, the publication writes. In a statement, Roderich Kiesewetter, a former general staff officer of the German army and conservative Bundestag deputy, called Trump’s security strategy a “slap in the face.”

“Anyone who writes about partners in this way will not defend them when it really matters,” he wrote. “What does this mean? The era of ‘security guarantees’ is over.”

Capability gapsThe challenge for Europe is how to move from rhetoric to action, the publication points out. “The stakes are enormous – not least because adopting continental defense would involve significant trade-offs in social welfare spending, which, in turn, could lead to the overthrow of governments,” the publication writes.

Another obstacle, it is pointed out, is institutional. “Given that the United States is the largest partner within NATO, the alliance is not a place where allies can plan for any post-American future.” “That would destroy the very purpose of NATO,” said one senior alliance diplomat.

According to three NATO diplomats, there is no contingency planning within the alliance for NATO without the US. They interpret signals from Washington not as a prelude to a US withdrawal from the alliance, but as a powerful wake-up call for Europe as Washington reorients itself to the Arctic and Indo-Pacific.

“The United States and NATO allies take our Article 5 commitments… very seriously,” US Ambassador Whitaker said last week. “Article 5 is ironclad.”

“But we have expectations,” he said at the Doha Forum in Qatar, namely: “[Europeans] will take over the conventional defense of the European continent.”

A third and particularly difficult task for Europeans, the publication writes, will be to replicate or replace the military capabilities currently provided by the US.

Europeans provide up to 60 percent of capabilities in some areas, said Oana Lungescu, a former NATO spokeswoman who is now a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute think tank. But in others – such as intelligence, heavy airlift, and deep strikes – the United States typically contributes a disproportionately large share.

“It will be very difficult for Europeans to fill some of these capability gaps, certainly within a year or two,” Lungescu said.

Congress proposed the US withdraw from NATO, calling it a “relic” of the Cold War10.12.25, 10:42 • 2308 views

Some officials pointed to the fact that even if the Trump administration wanted to withdraw from NATO, the US Congress could stand in the way. Indeed, US defense legislation, scheduled for a vote as early as this week, would place new restrictions on troop reductions in Europe, a bipartisan rebuke to the Trump administration’s strategy, the publication writes.

Anthony Gardner, a former US ambassador to the EU, said the NSS was nothing less than “a betrayal of 80 years of bipartisan US policy.”

“For many Europeans, the message is clear. The Trump administration has laid out its position. Europe, more than ever before, is listening – and taking action,” the publication notes.