NATO’s existence in danger

December 31, 2018

Countries like Germany, France, and Spain backed the idea of European Army but Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands have strongly opposed it. However, the facts suggest that this idea has a nonconcrete nature, and it is just a negligible reaction by Macron and Merkel against unilateral measures taken by the U.S. President. It has been a rather long time that the French President Emmanuel Macron, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, didn’t speak of the creation of an Independent European Army. Meanwhile, Germany and France spent 1.2 percent and 1.8 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) on defense spending under the NATO pact. Trump called on German and French officials to increase this amount to 2 percent. Britain and four other countries have so far been willing to devote 2% of their GDP on NATO defense spending, and 24 other countries have not yet responded to this request. This is a sign of a continuous conflict between the United States and other NATO members which will last for a long time. Talking about the prospect of a European army, the British Defense Secretary Gevin Williamson says Britain will never become part of a European army on my watch. NATO has delivered European security for the last 70 years and we should feel very proud of it. Should we challenge that by creating a separate military force? Without question not. To begin discussing a new EU army is risky and dents the security that NATO underwrites. London’s disapproval of the U.S. policies is not new. Though this approach seems to have built up on the eve of the departure of Britain from the EU, the British officials are pursuing to maintain their security relations with the United States and the EU member states under the NATO after leaving the EU. There is also lack of necessary will among countries such as Germany and France to achieve their security independence from the United States. This has led the Europe to adopt a passive approach towards Washington. This passivity can be well seen in security and economic affairs, and is also apparent in diverse stands taken by European leaders. Before Europe starts planning its own army it should fund the military that has protected its borders from aggression for 70 years. Two percent of GDP should not be beyond the wit of those who have amassed great wealth through the protection of NATO, primarily under the leadership of the US and UK. Many European citizens are calling for the abolition of NATO, a cause of financial and structural costs on them. Understandably, the internal conflicts in Europe will weaken the foundations of NATO and may lead the fall of this organization.