By: Zeshan Nawaz
In the summer of 1945, when the world leaders were signing the UN charter in San Francisco. The British permanent secretary of foreign affairs, Alec Gadogan, predicted that the Security Council has its own flaws because at the time of crisis when the super-powers were against each other, it could not work. In that period of time, the British Foreign Office started planning and lobbying for a Western Security Organization for the post-war era. Ernest Bevin was the first whistleblower in Europe for the creation of the Collective Defense Organization. In his Administration, Britain signed the Dunkirk Treaty with France, and later on the same administration successfully created the Western European Union in 1948, known as the Brussels Treaty. The great Bevin also sent papers to the US Secretary of State George Marshall and Senator Arthur Vandenberg in the US for the Atlantic Pact. Later on, these people became pioneers of NATO in 1949.
There are 32 current members of NATO; these states call themselves NATO allies. NATO membership is always open for states those are committed to contributing to the security of the North Atlantic area or EU. NATO is a defensive security organization that stands on the core values, such as consult and cooperate on defense and security-related issues. It also builds trust and is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes and helps to prevent conflict in the long run. The foundation of NATO stands on 14 articles that establish the legal, political and military framework of the organization. Article 5 is the most cherished and prominent among allies that guarantees the collective defense against imminent threats against any state of the Treaty.
In the light of President Trump’s unorthodox perspectives on the NATO alliance, the cost of a U.S participant in the organization has been the hot topic for a while. The United States is the only country that spends 3.1% of its GDP on defense. In 2014, President Trump stated that “The US insists that every NATO nation must spend at least 3% of their GDP on defense.” In recent discussions, President Trump wants to push NATO countries to contribute more in their defense and achieve 5% defense budget bar in the upcoming years.
In 2024, the U.S solely contributed $753 million to common funds, which are about 16% of the whole expenditures. In 2025, the Pentagon requested $3.9 billion for the European Deterrence Initiative program to “enhance the capability and readiness of U.S forces, NATO allies and regional partners of the U.S for a faster response to any aggression in Europe and transnational threats by any regional adversary against the sovereign territory of NATO nations”. In terms of operation capabilities, NATO is 90% depending on the U.S forces, from nuclear Deterrence to intelligence, surveillance and Reconnaissance.
Since the breakout of the US-Iran conflict, President Donald Trump has considered withdrawing from NATO and lashing out at allies for not getting involved in the conflict. In 2023, Congress passed a law, led by Marco Rubio, the current Secretary of State, that gives legislative power to the president to withdraw from NATO. This law was included in the National Defense Authorization ACT in 2024 and later on signed by President Joe Biden. In a recent statement by Marco Rubio, he shared the President’s point of view during the press conference, “unfortunately, we are going to have to reexamine whether or not this alliance (NATO) has served this country well for a while, is still serving that purpose, or has now become a one-way street”. This is happening because during the war with Iran, the European states were hesitant to allow the U.S. to use their land to engage Iran militarily. Moreover, withdrawing from the Treaty, Article 13 of the NATO charter creates room for States that are willing to withdraw from the organization. Any member state may withdraw one year after bestowing a “notice of denunciation” to the U.S government.
The question may arise here, what will be the Future of NATO after the U.S? Does the UK have the capacity, capability, and Political will to sustain NATO as a military alliance? In a recent statement, the British Prime Minister Keir Starmer indicated that the United Kingdom is “fully committed” to NATO and “whatever the pressure on me and others, whatever the noise, I am going to act in the British national interest”. That shows the United Kingdom has the political will to carry on in NATO as an organization. The United Kingdom is a complete fit that can bring positive attributes to the leadership role in NATO. The United Kingdom, with its Nuclear umbrella and defense ties with fellow members of the Joint Expeditionary Forces in Baltic and Northern European nations, has capabilities to influence NATO and its decision-making process. There are possibilities that the UK will rethink joining the EU to win the EU countries’ trust for better cooperation.
The current British government has political will; in 2024, it decided to start a Strategic Defense Review, putting “NATO first” policy at the core of Britain’s defense plans and formulating a framework to fulfill that commitment. The UK was the only country that was delivering the promised aid to Ukraine and also contributing forty million pounds to NATO’s Comprehensive Assistance Package for Ukraine.
On the decision-making table, the UK has all the potential resources to take charge of NATO, but in terms of military capabilities and on technological grounds, the UK has a huge landscape to be filled. If It wants to hegemon state in the EU. The UK holds all the trump cards to take over NATO, but it needs a stable economy and government for five consecutive years. As per Heather Williams opinion, a well-known political commentator, In the recently released Strategic Defense Review, the UK illustrated that “we are the front. Everybody gets behind us. We are going to set the pace here”, this is what the UK wants from NATO member states.
