NATO Chief Warns Europe Against Illusions of Strategic Independence Without the US

The debate over Europe’s ability to defend itself without the United States has resurfaced sharply after NATO’s chief delivered a blunt warning: Europe should “keep on dreaming” if it believes it can ensure its own security without American backing. The remark, striking in its candour, underscores a long-standing reality at the heart of the transatlantic alliance — despite decades of integration, ambition, and investment, European defence remains deeply intertwined with US military power.

At a time of mounting geopolitical uncertainty, the comment has resonated far beyond NATO headquarters. Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine, growing instability in the Middle East, and rising global competition with China have forced European leaders to confront uncomfortable questions about military readiness, strategic autonomy, and political unity. While the idea of a self-reliant European defence has gained traction in recent years, NATO’s leadership appears unconvinced that such ambitions can be realised any time soon.

The Reality Behind Europe’s Defence Capabilities

Europe collectively spends hundreds of billions of dollars on defence each year, and several countries — including France, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Poland — maintain sizable and technologically advanced armed forces. On paper, this should amount to formidable military power. In practice, however, Europe’s capabilities are fragmented, uneven, and heavily dependent on US assets.

The United States provides the backbone of NATO’s deterrence. This includes advanced intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems, strategic airlift, missile defence, cyber capabilities, and, crucially, nuclear deterrence. US forces also supply much of the alliance’s command-and-control infrastructure, allowing multinational forces to operate cohesively during crises. Without these capabilities, Europe’s ability to respond rapidly and decisively to large-scale threats would be significantly reduced.

NATO officials have repeatedly pointed out that while European allies are increasing defence spending, money alone does not immediately translate into operational readiness. Developing advanced weapons systems, training personnel, and integrating forces across borders is a process that takes years, if not decades.

Strategic Autonomy: Aspiration vs. Reality

Calls for “strategic autonomy” have been especially prominent within the European Union, particularly since the first Trump presidency raised doubts about Washington’s long-term commitment to European security. Proponents argue that Europe must be able to act independently when US priorities shift elsewhere. Initiatives such as the EU’s Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) and the European Defence Fund are steps in that direction.

Yet NATO’s leadership suggests these efforts, while valuable, remain insufficient. One of the central problems is political fragmentation. Defence decisions in Europe are still largely made at the national level, leading to duplication of systems, incompatible equipment, and competing strategic visions. Unlike the US, Europe lacks a unified military command structure capable of directing large-scale operations on its own.

Moreover, some European countries remain reluctant to commit to sustained increases in defence budgets, particularly during periods of economic strain. While many NATO members have pledged to meet the alliance’s target of spending at least 2% of GDP on defence, not all have done so consistently.

The Ukraine War as a Wake-Up Call

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has served as a stark reminder of Europe’s vulnerabilities. The conflict exposed shortages in ammunition, air defence systems, and heavy weaponry across European arsenals. It also highlighted the speed at which the US can mobilise military aid and coordinate logistics on a global scale — a capability Europe currently lacks.

American support has been decisive for Ukraine, from intelligence sharing to advanced weapons deliveries. European countries have contributed significantly, but NATO leaders acknowledge that without Washington’s leadership, the alliance’s response would have been slower and less effective.

This reality reinforces the NATO chief’s message: transatlantic cooperation is not a choice of convenience, but a strategic necessity.

Burden-Sharing and Political Messaging

The blunt tone of the “keep on dreaming” remark also reflects growing frustration within NATO over burden-sharing. The US has long urged European allies to do more, arguing that an imbalance in defence contributions undermines alliance cohesion. By emphasising Europe’s continued dependence, NATO leadership may be seeking to push European governments toward deeper, faster reforms rather than symbolic gestures.

At the same time, the message serves as reassurance to Washington that NATO remains committed to a US-led security framework. In an era when American foreign policy debates increasingly question overseas commitments, reaffirming the indispensability of the US role may be seen as a way to anchor American engagement in Europe.

Looking Ahead

Europe’s defence landscape is changing. Defence spending is rising, cooperation is improving, and awareness of security threats is higher than it has been in decades. However, the NATO chief’s warning suggests that aspirations of full military independence remain far from achievable.

Rather than signalling weakness, the remarks highlight a pragmatic assessment of current realities. For the foreseeable future, Europe’s security is inseparable from the United States. The challenge for European leaders is not to replace the transatlantic alliance, but to strengthen it — by investing more, coordinating better, and ensuring that Europe becomes a stronger partner rather than a passive beneficiary.

In the end, the dream of a fully self-defending Europe may persist, but NATO’s leadership is clear: for now, it remains just that — a dream.