As top threats to American security and prosperity shift decisively to Asia, America’s attention is dangerously divided.
For more than a decade, Washington has attempted to shift focus toward the Indo-Pacific and the growing risk posed by China. Yet crises keep dragging us back to Europe and the Middle East, undermining our strategic focus and overextending our military.
Europe’s reliance on U.S. protection, rather than on their own capabilities, has contributed significantly to U.S. challenges in keeping the rebalance toward Asia in focus. With the debate about the future of European security now at the forefront of the global conversation, we now have an opportunity, and an obligation, to get back on track.
The 2025 National Security Strategy, newly released by the White House, sets the tone for the task ahead:
“The days of the United States propping up the entire world order like Atlas are over. We count among our many allies and partners dozens of wealthy, sophisticated nations that must assume primary responsibility for their regions and contribute far more to our collective defense.”
A Decade of Distractions
Faced with competing security challenges across the globe, correctly balancing U.S. attention and resources is a tough task for any administration.
Former President Obama launched the Pivot to Asia in 2011 after withdrawing from Iraq. The resulting power vacuum contributed to Syria’s civil war, Islamic State’s rise, and Russia’s return to Middle Eastern influence operations. In subsequent years, America’s strategic attention snapped back to managing chaos we thought we had left behind.
Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine with “little green men” forced Washington to divert additional military and diplomatic resources to Europe that could have strengthened our Pacific posture. While the first Trump administration reduced some Middle Eastern commitments and renewed the Asia pivot, those regional fires later reignited under former President Biden.
The “Freerider” Problem
European complacency has compounded the challenge for the U.S. Many European Union (EU) leaders saw a silver lining in Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, assuming the U.S. would have no choice but to redouble its long-term commitment to European security.
Yet American power remains dangerously overstretched, unable to consistently accomplish basic duties expected of a major power, like stopping attacks on international shipping by Iranian-backed militias.
With President Trump’s return to office, Washington shows diminishing patience for allies perceived as freeriding on American defense spending. While Americans agree on little these days, the China threat enjoys bipartisan agreement across party lines.
The lessons are clear: Europeans must get serious about providing their own security if they want continued American partnership rather than abandonment. It is only a matter of time before the United States, out of necessity, shifts greater resources and political capital toward the Indo-Pacific.
Restoring Fairness and Burden-Sharing
European freeriding has long frustrated American taxpayers, who disproportionately fund NATO at the expense of domestic spending while Europeans expanded social programs. Many Europeans, meanwhile, resent their junior partner status in American-led foreign policy.
Both sides now have an opportunity to match actions with rhetoric.
American policymakers faced a similar decision after the Cold War ended. When the EU proposed a 60,000-strong independent force, Washington killed the initiative, demanding the EU neither duplicate NATO capabilities nor decouple European security from the alliance.
At the time, America enjoyed unipolar dominance and believed it could manage everything. Today’s strategic environment offers no such luxury.
Fortunately, Europeans strongly support greater involvement in their own defense. Polling shows consistently strong support for common EU defense policy, including transferring command and budget responsibilities from individual nations to EU institutions.
At the same time, Washington’s longstanding push for more European military investment has occasionally clashed with its desire to maintain broad control over European security architecture. This tension now threatens alliance cohesion as American strategic priorities shift toward Asia.
The Path Forward: Empowering Self-Reliant Allies
To stay relevant in the 21st century, NATO must return to realist principles and stay laser-focused on the core challenges the alliance is designed to address.
Technical solutions alone cannot solve NATO’s fundamental political challenges. Proposals for pan-European defense industries and joint exercises might improve collective action, but they address symptoms rather than causes.
Although Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has temporarily refocused NATO, new crises will emerge. Nearly four years into the war, Ukraine has already lost some of its political binding power for European action.
A realist approach recognizes that nations have permanent interests, not permanent friends. To be clear, this does not require sacrificing the alliance. Instead, member interests must shape alliance priorities, rather than the other way around.
Not every NATO member shares Eastern Europe’s level of concern about Russia. Spain and Italy focus increasingly on North African migration and Mediterranean security, while Turkey cannot escape Middle Eastern volatility. Competing national priorities and differing historical rivalries make aligning around a single security framework an uphill battle.
Reimagining the U.S. Role
America’s leadership of NATO succeeded for decades in facilitating one of Europe’s most peaceful periods in history. Our strength came from our credibility as a neutral arbiter of European disputes, backed by military, economic, and diplomatic power that could dictate alliance priorities.
Yet in the current climate, that power has diminished relative to rising competitors. What’s more, American commitment to Europe has waned because our attention and resources remain dangerously divided.
Fortunately, America can prioritize national interests without choosing between European freeriding and NATO dissolution. The path lies in recognizing and empowering allies to help themselves.
The United States supports partners who can demonstrate self-reliance. The more European states prove they can carry their own strategic weight, the more Washington will view Europe as a serious security partner. When allies proved unable to stand independently, America eventually abandoned them, as in Vietnam and Afghanistan.
Rewarding Allies Who Step Up
Ukraine presents a compelling example. Washington initially doubted Ukraine’s ability to resist Russian aggression. Between 2016 and 2021, the Department of Defense’s Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) provided $1.3 billion in aid. Once Ukraine defied Western predictions and proved it could resist Putin’s war machine, American security assistance flooded in. USAI funding jumped to $6.3 billion in 2022, then doubled to $14 billion in 2024.
The United States lacks the power to dictate European security policy and should not pursue such control. Doing so breeds resentment on both sides of the Atlantic while undermining American regional leadership.
Instead, Washington should point European allies to Ukraine’s example, demonstrating that America will empower rather than hinder them in securing national interests while providing mediation for clashing intra-European priorities.
Helping NATO Rise to the Occasion
Instead of promoting greater EU integration, Washington should focus on empowering individual NATO states to secure their national interests while serving as a security mediator and guarantor against pan-European threats. This increased European security independence paradoxically makes it easier for America to maintain NATO leadership while pivoting toward Asia.
Congress should support this transition by conditioning future European aid on measurable increases in defense spending and capability development. The Special Operations community’s experience training partner forces provides proven models for building allied self-reliance without permanent American dependence.
America cannot afford to remain Europe’s security crutch while China builds military capabilities designed to exclude us from the Indo-Pacific. A more realist NATO serves both American strategic interests and European security independence.
