This article is the fifth in a five-part MSNBC Daily series, “The Future of NATO.” With the Trump administration attacking allies, removing troops from European training missions, handing Ukraine’s bargaining chips to Russia and refusing to guarantee European security even as “backstop” — we’re asking five crucial questions about the future of NATO, the U.S. and Europe.
Any assessment of NATO’s future based on a pre-Jan. 20, 2025, calculus is wrong.
The United States is not only no longer a dependable ally of the other countries in the alliance it played a central role in building, it has switched sides. The Trump administration is now openly hostile to those allies, actively working to weaken the trans-Atlantic partnership and heavily supportive of the Kremlin and the loose alliance of ethnonationalist, anti-democratic nations it leads.
That is no exaggeration. It is not a politically biased assessment.
Just last month, we heard senior U.S. officials talk of lifting sanctions against Russia without receiving any concessions from Russia for doing so. The positioning has naturally caused a furor among European leaders who consider it, rightly, to be a betrayal and worse, a grave strategic error.
The U.S. also escalated its trade war that largely targets and will heavily penalize the members of the alliance. In response, Canada’s new prime minister, Mark Carney, gravely announced that Canada could no longer look upon the U.S., its neighbor, as a dependable friend any longer.
Meanwhile, the U.S. also raised tensions with another NATO member, Denmark, by continuing its threats to seize Greenland. These threats were followed by a visit to that island by the U.S. vice president and his wife.
In a somewhat smaller but equally chilling action, the U.S. detained a Russian scientist working at Harvard Medical School and it appears is preparing to send her, a critic of Russian leader Vladimir Putin, to Russia, where her fate is likely to be a very unhappy one.
These actions are consistent with what has to be seen as a clear and multifaceted policy shift away from the allies and principles that have guided the U.S. since World War II, and toward a rapid realignment that will alter geopolitics to a degree that would have been unimaginable just months ago.
The U.S. has turned on Ukraine and sought to force it to end the conflict that Russia started. It has made demands of Ukraine but virtually none of Russia. It has picked fights with Ukraine while sending emissaries to fawn over Putin.
The United States is not only no longer a dependable ally of the other countries in the alliance it played a central role in building.
One by one, U.S. agencies and initiatives that were created to defend against Russia or to enable the U.S. to deter or be prepared for future conflict with Russia have been shut down or gutted. This includes standing down cyberdefenses and operations against Russia, shutting down the program that defended the U.S. from Russian election interference, shutting down the program that tracked and prosecuted wrongdoing by Russian oligarchs, firing from the government lawyers and others who investigated Russia’s efforts to influence Trump in the past. High-level national security posts were given to Russia apologists and individuals who spread Russian propaganda. Incompetents were placed in other critical national security jobs, and the entire tenor of the administration’s framing of the U.S.-Russia relationship was drastically different from any U.S. government since 1945.
Allies have seen threats, hostility, trade wars, assertions the U.S. won’t defend them if they don’t contribute more to defense, general lack of solidarity with the U.S. and even, this week, as part of the Signal messaging scandal revelations, contempt from the U.S. vice president and secretary of defense about what they perceive as European free-riding.
At this point, given the scope, range and consistency of the shifts in tone, policy and action, U.S. allies will increasingly have to reconcile themselves to accepting that a profound shift has occurred, as Canada’s Carney recently articulated. This will and should produce major changes in doctrine and strategy.








