NATO is spending big but its credibility has taken a major hit

The push to strengthen NATO deterrence is colliding with an increasingly public rift over who can be relied on to stand together, according to an Associated Press report. The report said European allies and Canada are pouring billions of dollars into helping Ukraine and have pledged to raise defense spending, but that confidence in NATO’s unity has taken a hit over the past year as trust inside the alliance frays.

The most prominent flashpoints cited by AP involved repeated U.S. President Donald Trump threats tied to Greenland and later backlash over Trump comments about allied troops in Afghanistan. AP said that even as the heat around Greenland has subsided for now, the infighting has undercut NATO’s ability to deter adversaries, including Russia, and analysts described the damage to NATO’s credibility as long-lasting.

Sophia Besch of Carnegie Europe, quoted in the AP report, said the Greenland episode “crossed a line that cannot be uncrossed,” adding, “Even without force or sanctions, that breach weakens the alliance in a lasting way.” AP said tensions in Europe have also registered in Moscow as NATO’s credibility—particularly under U.S. leadership—has come into question.

AP described the alliance’s deterrence logic as depending on whether President Vladimir Putin believes NATO will respond if Russia expands its war beyond Ukraine. The report said Sergey Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, noted last week that “It’s a major upheaval for Europe, and we are watching it,” linking the dispute to the risk that deterrence assumptions are changing.

In parallel, AP said critics of European defense spending for years have pressed allies to do more, and in July European partners and Canada agreed to begin investing 5% of gross domestic product on defense. AP said the goal is for allies to spend as much of their economic output on core defense as the United States—around 3.5% of GDP—by 2035, with an additional 1.5% directed to security-related projects such as upgrades to bridges and air and seaports.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has welcomed the spending pledges as a sign of NATO’s strength, and AP said Rutte recently told reporters, “fundamentally thanks to Donald J. Trump, NATO is stronger than it ever was.” The report said Rutte’s public stance has also raised concerns among some observers because he is tasked with preventing any U.S. pullback from NATO, even as he has pointedly refused to address the Greenland rift directly.

Beyond deterrence and spending, the AP report focused on NATO’s Article 5 collective security guarantee, which is triggered by an attack on one ally and requires a response from all. AP said Trump’s designs on Greenland challenge the principle of keeping all allies’ territories inviolable, noting that Article 5 does not apply in internal disputes because it can be triggered only unanimously.

AP said two U.S. senators—Democrat Jeanne Shaheen and Republican Lisa Murkowski—argued in a New York Times op-ed that threats against Greenland and NATO undermine U.S. interests. The report quoted the senators writing: “Instead of strengthening our alliances, threats against Greenland and NATO are undermining America’s own interests,” adding that “Suggestions that the United States would seize or coerce allies to sell territory do not project strength.”

AP also said Trump has questioned whether allies would help the United States and drew additional anger when he raised doubts about the role of European and Canadian troops that fought and died alongside Americans in Afghanistan, before later partially reversing his remarks. In congressional testimony, the report said U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio rejected criticism that Trump has undermined NATO, saying: “The stronger our partners are in NATO, the more flexibility the United States will have to secure our interests in different parts of the world,” and “That’s not an abandonment of NATO. That is a reality of the 21st century and a world that’s changing now.”

AP reported that Moscow is not easily deterred by NATO’s spending rhetoric, even as Europe points to a broader threat picture that includes sabotage, drone incursions and attempts at cyber and information operations. It said Kaja Kallas, the EU’s foreign policy chief, told reporters this week that “it has become painfully clear that Russia will remain a major security threat for the long term,” and that Europe is “fending off cyberattacks, sabotage against critical infrastructure, foreign interference and information manipulation, military intimidation, territorial threats and political meddling.”

The report said officials across Europe have described incidents including sabotage and mysterious drone flights over airports and military bases, and that identifying culprits is difficult, with Russia denying responsibility. AP also cited Rutte warning in a year-end address that Europe faces imminent risk, quoting him as saying: “Russia has brought war back to Europe, and we must be prepared for the scale of war our grandparents or great-grandparents endured.”

At the same time, AP said Lavrov warned in Russia that the Greenland dispute heralded a “deep crisis” for NATO. It quoted Lavrov telling reporters that, “It was hard to imagine before that such a thing could happen,” as he considered the possibility that “one NATO member is going to attack another NATO member.” AP added that Russian state media mocked Europe’s reaction as “impotent rage,” and said Putin’s presidential envoy declared that “trans-Atlantic unity is over.”

Looking ahead, the AP report said U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is scheduled to meet NATO counterparts on Feb. 12, with the Greenland region and Arctic security expected to feature prominently on the agenda. AP said it is unclear whether Hegseth will announce a new drawdown of U.S. troops in Europe—forces that are central to deterrence—pointing to last year’s warning by Hegseth that America’s security priorities lie elsewhere.

AP further said doubts about the U.S. commitment have been fueled by NATO learning in October that up to 1,500 American troops would be withdrawn from an area bordering Ukraine, angering ally Romania. AP cited a report from the European Union Institute for Security Studies saying that although U.S. troops are unlikely to disappear overnight, doubts about U.S. commitment mean “the deterrence edifice becomes shakier,” and it quoted the report’s authors, Veronica Anghel and Giuseppe Spatafora, writing: “Adversaries start believing they can probe, sabotage and escalate without triggering a unified response.”