Decoupling America from European Security: A Strategy for a Strong Europe Without U.S. Subsidization

The Big Picture

For decades, American taxpayers have subsidized Europe’s security, allowing European nations to free-ride on U.S. military protection while underinvesting in their own defense. Since the founding of NATO in 1949, the United States has been the primary guarantor of European stability, maintaining military bases, supplying advanced weaponry, and deploying thousands of troops across the continent. While this arrangement made strategic sense during the Cold War, it has outlived its usefulness in a world where Europe is more than capable of defending itself.

Today, Europe boasts some of the wealthiest economies in the world. The European Union collectively has a GDP of over $17 trillion (European Commission, 2023), and multiple European nations—such as Germany, France, and the UK—have the resources to build strong, independent militaries. Yet, these nations continue to rely on Washington for their security, while simultaneously pursuing policies that undermine American interests—from energy dependence on Russia to trade imbalances with China.

It is time for the United States to end this outdated arrangement and force Europe to take full responsibility for its own defense. This policy proposal outlines a gradual but decisive strategy to decouple the United States from European security, ensuring that NATO members increase their defense spending, take control of their own military affairs, and stop using American power as a crutch. A strong Europe is desirable, but not if it comes at the expense of American taxpayers and strategic priorities.

Operative Definitions

1. NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) – A military alliance formed in 1949, originally designed to counter the Soviet Union, but now serving as Europe’s primary security umbrella, largely funded by the United States.
2. Article 5 of NATO – The collective defense clause stating that an attack on one NATO member is an attack on all, obligating the U.S. to come to Europe’s defense in the event of conflict.
3. 2% GDP Defense Spending Requirement – A NATO guideline that members should spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense, though most European nations routinely fail to meet this target.
4. Free-Riding – The practice of benefiting from American military protection without investing adequately in one’s own defense.

Important Facts and Statistics

1. The United States spends over $860 billion annually on defense, compared to Europe’s combined military expenditure of approximately $350 billion (SIPRI, 2023).
2. Only 11 out of 31 NATO members meet the 2% GDP defense spending requirement, despite repeated U.S. demands for increased military investment (NATO Annual Report, 2023).
3. Germany, Europe’s largest economy, spends only 1.6% of its GDP on defense, despite having a $4.3 trillion economy (German Defense Ministry, 2023).
4. The U.S. currently maintains over 100,000 troops in Europe, stationed in Germany, Poland, Italy, and the UK, with permanent bases subsidized by U.S. taxpayers (Pentagon Report, 2023).
5. The European Union collectively has a larger population, GDP, and economic power than Russia, yet continues to rely on the U.S. for its defense instead of developing a coherent European military force (European Commission, 2023).

Five-Point Policy Plan to Decouple the U.S. from European Security

Phase 1: Shift NATO’s Financial Burden to European Nations

The United States should immediately implement a policy requiring NATO allies to cover a greater share of operational costs. The current arrangement allows European nations to underfund their own defense while expecting the U.S. to foot the bill. Washington should demand that all NATO members meet the 2% GDP requirement within two years—failure to do so should result in a reduction of U.S. military aid and logistical support. Additionally, the U.S. should scale down financial contributions to NATO’s central budget, forcing wealthier European states such as Germany and France to increase their funding contributions.

Phase 2: Reduce U.S. Troop Presence in Europe

The permanent stationing of over 100,000 U.S. troops in Europe is unnecessary and counterproductive. Over the next five years, the U.S. should gradually withdraw the majority of its ground forces, reducing permanent bases and shifting operational control to European militaries. Special forces and rapid deployment units can remain in strategic locations, such as Poland and the Baltic states, but the responsibility for large-scale conventional defense should fall to European nations. The U.S. should also close outdated military bases in Germany and Italy, redirecting resources to the Indo-Pacific region, where American military power is needed to counter China.

Phase 3: Encourage the Development of an Independent European Defense Force

Europe does not lack military capability—it lacks coordination and investment. The U.S. should pressure the European Union to establish a fully functional, independent military alliance separate from NATO, ensuring that European security no longer relies on American leadership. The European Union has already discussed forming a continental military force, but without U.S. withdrawal pressure, Europe will never take the initiative. By forcing Europe to take responsibility for its own security, the U.S. will free itself from unnecessary entanglements and focus on its true strategic interests.

Phase 4: End the Nuclear Deterrence Umbrella for Europe

The U.S. currently maintains nuclear weapons in Europe as part of NATO’s deterrence strategy, including at air bases in Germany, Italy, Belgium, and the Netherlands. This arrangement subsidizes European security at the cost of American taxpayers and strategic flexibility. As part of the decoupling process, the U.S. should gradually withdraw nuclear deterrence commitments, requiring European nations—especially France and the UK—to take full responsibility for nuclear defense on the continent. The U.S. can maintain strategic nuclear deterrence against Russia from its own territories, but Europe must develop its own nuclear posture instead of relying on Washington’s umbrella.

Phase 5: End America’s Role as Europe’s Policeman and Prioritize U.S. Interests

Once the U.S. military presence is reduced and NATO’s financial burden shifts to Europe, Washington must end its role as the default “problem solver” for European conflicts. European nations have repeatedly dragged the U.S. into conflicts that do not serve American interests, from the Balkan interventions of the 1990s to ongoing tensions with Russia. Moving forward, the U.S. should only intervene in European security issues when they pose a direct and immediate threat to American sovereignty, trade, or strategic interests.

Why This Initiative Is Important

The continued subsidization of European security is an outdated relic of Cold War-era thinking. Europe is more than capable of defending itself, yet it continues to avoid necessary military investments because of U.S. protection. This weakens Europe, drains American resources, and keeps the U.S. entangled in foreign conflicts that do not serve its national interests.

By decoupling America from European security, the U.S. will free itself from unnecessary military commitments, reallocate defense resources to more urgent threats (such as China), and push Europe toward self-sufficiency. The long-term result will be a stronger, more independent Europe—and an America that focuses on defending its own homeland rather than subsidizing the military weakness of wealthy allies.

A strong Europe is desirable, but not at America’s expense. The time has come to end the free ride and put American interests first.

Sources

European Commission. (2023). EU Military Expenditure and Economic Power Report.

German Defense Ministry. (2023). Germany’s Defense Budget and NATO Commitments.

NATO Annual Report. (2023). NATO Defense Spending and Member Contributions.

Pentagon Report. (2023). U.S. Troop Deployments in Europe: Cost and Strategic Review.

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). (2023). Global Military Expenditure Database.