For the first time in its 77-year history, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization will conduct a major military exercise without the participation of its largest and most powerful member, the United States. The decision marks a watershed moment for the alliance as European members recalibrate their security arrangements in response to growing uncertainty about American commitment to collective defense.
The exercise, scheduled for later this year and involving forces from Germany, Spain, Poland, and other European NATO members, will simulate a large-scale conventional conflict scenario. According to officials familiar with the planning, the absence of U.S. forces is not merely symbolic—it reflects a deliberate effort by European allies to test their capacity for independent military operations.
"Europeans must be able to defend themselves," a senior defense official from a participating nation told reporters, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military planning. "We can no longer assume American participation in every contingency."
The move comes amid deepening anxiety across Europe about the durability of the transatlantic security guarantee. Recent statements from Washington questioning NATO burden-sharing, combined with public musings about withdrawing from alliance commitments, have accelerated conversations that were previously confined to academic circles and classified strategy sessions.
To understand today's headlines, we must look at yesterday's decisions. NATO was forged in 1949 as an explicit counterweight to Soviet power, with American military might serving as the ultimate deterrent against aggression. The alliance's Article 5 mutual defense clause has been invoked only once—by the United States after the September 11 attacks—cementing American centrality to European security.
Yet European defense spending patterns have long reflected an assumption that Washington would bear the heaviest burden. While NATO guidelines call for members to spend 2% of GDP on defense, many European countries fell short of that target for decades. The situation began changing after Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea, and accelerated dramatically following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
Now, European capitals are confronting a scenario they hoped would remain theoretical: a NATO without guaranteed American leadership. The planned exercise is designed to address fundamental questions. Can European forces coordinate effectively without U.S. command structures? Do European militaries possess sufficient logistics, intelligence, and air capabilities to sustain major operations independently?
The answers remain uncertain. Despite increases in defense budgets, Europe still relies heavily on American satellite intelligence, precision munitions, and heavy airlift capacity. European ammunition stockpiles, already strained by transfers to Ukraine, would struggle to sustain a prolonged conventional conflict.
The exercise also carries political implications that extend beyond military preparedness. By demonstrating a capacity for autonomous action, European NATO members aim to preserve alliance cohesion while hedging against American unreliability. It is a delicate balance—too much emphasis on European independence could accelerate American disengagement, while too little preparation could leave Europe vulnerable.
For Russia, the exercise offers a complex signal. On one hand, European unity and military competence serve as a deterrent. On the other hand, visible cracks in the transatlantic alliance may embolden Moscow to test NATO resolve in ways previously considered too risky.
The ultimate question is whether NATO can evolve into a more balanced partnership—or whether the fissures now appearing will prove irreparable. This exercise will not provide definitive answers. But it represents an acknowledgment that the old certainties no longer hold.
