On February 16, in Munich, Germany, Christoph Hoysgen, President of the Munich Security Council, delivered a speech at the opening ceremony of the 60th Munich Security Conference (MUAN). Photo: Xinhua News Agency.
Recently, according to foreign media reports quoted by the CCTV news client, the European Union is considering the establishment of an alternative organization to NATO in case the United States may withdraw its security guarantees to Europe in the future due to fears that the results of the US elections in November 2024 will lead to another deterioration of transatlantic relations.
According to the report, the European Union**, which is in Germany for the 60th Munich Security Conference, said that they are paying more attention than ever to the polling data before the United States**. Not only do they pay attention to the data of Biden and Trump in swing states, but they also analyze and study data on the election of the Senate and House of Representatives, trying to ** the position of the next Congress.
According to the article, recently, the European Union has privately discussed the establishment of a NATO supplementary body that will include the entire European continent. Once the United States withdraws its security guarantees to Europe, this institution can replace NATO and strengthen Europe's collective defense.
However, the report also said that EU member states are far from reaching a consensus on this. France and Germany are arguing over who should bear the agency's spending. The countries of Eastern Europe do not have complete trust in the countries of Western Europe when it comes to Russia. In addition, there is no idea of a unified nuclear shield in European countries.
Trump's statements irritated the European Union.
It was Trump who spurred the EU** to privately discuss the creation of an alternative to NATO.
On Feb. 10, Trump said at a rally in South Carolina that if he won again, he would encourage Russia to "do whatever they want" if they failed to spend enough on defense in the face of a Russian attack.
The incident, which took place before the 60th Munich Security Conference, immediately caused anxiety among the European participants attending the meeting. The Munich Security Report 2024 is pessimistic about this year's global security outlook, saying that Western countries have fallen into "war fatigue" due to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and the optimism about peace, stability and economic development in the post-Cold War era has dissipated, and the world is at risk of falling into a "lose-lose" situation.
After Trump's statement on the NATO issue, some European participants openly listed the United States as a global security risk factor.
It's normal for Europeans to feel nervous. Although Trump sometimes contradicts and surprisingly remarks, he has always been a "suspicious of NATO" when it comes to dealing with NATO.
During the United States in 2016, Trump repeatedly said that NATO was "outdated"; When NATO leaders convened a summit in 2018, Trump asked then-*** adviser John Bolton: "Should we make history here and withdraw from NATO?" ”
During the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2020, Trump told European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, "NATO is dead, we will leave, we will withdraw from NATO." A closer look at his words reveals that Trump's disdain for NATO dates back to his days as a businessman during the Cold War.
NATO headquarters in Brussels. Photo: Xinhua News Agency.
European allies are also not at ease with Biden.
Biden said that Trump's remarks were "terrible, dangerous, and inconsistent with the spirit of the United States", but his remarks did not seem to have much of a reassuring effect on European allies.
The thing is clear. The Russia-Ukraine conflict, which the EU is most worried about, is firmly stuck in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, despite the fact that Biden ** and the Democratic-controlled Senate continue to increase a new round of aid to Ukraine.
On the other hand, everyone can see that the EU and the United States have different attitudes on the current round of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the Red Sea escort issue, and Biden's "dual aircraft carrier" strategy and air strikes against Yemen's Houthi forces that have lasted for weeks have not played a deterrent role. On the contrary, the Houthis recently damaged a British freighter in the Gulf of Aden, forcing the crew to abandon the ship. This is the first time since the outbreak of the Red Sea crisis that a freighter may have been sunk by an attack.
Therefore, some EU** believe that even if Biden wins the next ** election, the US-EU transatlantic partnership will still change. Instead of complaining about this and that, it is better to rely on yourself.
This Feb. 20 screenshot shows the wreckage of a U.S. MQ-9 drone suspected to have been shot down by the Houthis falling onto a beach in the Red Sea city of Hodeidah, Yemen. Photo: Xinhua News Agency.
It's still early to have a "second life insurance".
After Trump's shocking remarks against NATO in South Carolina on February 10 broke, EU countries reacted immediately.
On 12 February, the Foreign Ministers of France, Germany and Poland met near Paris for the Weimar Triangle mechanism. This is a mechanism established in 1991 by France, Germany and Poland for regular meetings of foreign ministers.
At the meeting, French Prime Minister Sejourne said that while maintaining the military alliance of NATO, Europe must strengthen its own security construction, so as to have a second "life insurance". At the same time, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk also traveled to Paris and Berlin to meet with French Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. Tusk has long advocated that the EU become a powerful military alliance on its own.
Europe has always pursued the idea of strategic autonomy, and there are also some loose mechanisms similar to the "Weimar Triangle" and the Baltic Sea collective defense. But for now, the EU is still too far from having a "second life insurance".
So far, France and Germany, the two pillars of the EU, have spent only 1 percent of GDP on their military spending9% and 165%, not yet up to the Trump standard. Coupled with the current poor economic situation, where will the funds be used to promote the establishment of an alternative organization to NATO?
In addition, there is the question of who will be in charge, and the lack of mutual trust between the "old Europe" and the "new Europe". And the EU does not have a unified alternative nuclear shield.
So far, the EU's discussion on the establishment of an alternative organization to NATO is like a private muttering after being charged protection money by the boss, and if this matter is really put on the agenda, more stimulation may be needed. For example, Trump is really back and has issued a new rant against the EU members of NATO.
Written by Xu Lifan (columnist).
Edited by Chi Daohua.
Proofread by Zhao Lin.