An alliance that for over seventy years has represented the cornerstone of Western security now risks turning into something more uncertain and conditional. This is the thesis at the heart of the analysis by Wojciech Michnik, assistant at the Jagiellonian University of Krakow, published in the bimonthly magazine New Eastern Europe, according to which a progressive distancing of the United States from NATO would produce a true geopolitical earthquake in Central Europe.
“The last three months have caused NATO more damage than any other quarter in the Alliance’s history,” observed Ivo Daalder, former US ambassador to NATO, in The Economist. A judgment that, Michnik emphasizes, from the Central European perspective appears far from exaggerated.
A STRONGER AND MORE FRAGILE ALLIANCE
In the years following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, NATO had regained unity and a clear strategic mission: deterrence against Moscow and defense of the continent. Today, however, this clarity is progressively fading. Not due to a lack of military tools, but because of growing political tensions between Washington and various European allies.
The result is an obvious paradox: operationally, especially along the eastern flank, the Alliance has never been so robust. Politically, however, it appears increasingly vulnerable. The military strengthening, with multinational contingents and a significant US presence, coexists with growing uncertainty about the solidity of mutual commitments.
Divisions have deepened with the conflict between the United States and Israel against Iran, in front of which European countries have chosen not to participate in out-of-area operations. Even the accommodating Secretary General Mark Rutte, while calling the American actions “important,” reiterated that “NATO as an alliance will not go to war.” A position that provoked a reaction from President Donald Trump, who lamented the lack of support and openly criticized allies, including Italy.
DOUBTS IN CENTRAL EUROPE ABOUT THE AMERICAN GUARANTEE
Trump’s statements, who called a NATO without the United States a “paper tiger” and suggested that American protection might depend on European contributions in other theaters, are interpreted in Central Europe as a signal of a “redefinition” of the Alliance’s rules: “the principle of collective defense would thus risk becoming a conditional commitment.”
For countries like Poland, this prospect has direct implications. Situated between the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad and the theater of war in Ukraine, Warsaw has built its strategy on the US presence as a pillar of security. In recent years it has significantly increased military spending, approaching 5% of GDP, and has strongly supported the strengthening of NATO on the eastern front.
However, Michnik notes, “the enhancement of military capabilities cannot compensate for political uncertainty.” If participation in out-of-area missions became a sort of loyalty test, “the very nature of the Alliance would be altered.” Deterrence, based on credibility and trust, “would begin to weaken precisely in the most sensitive areas,” from the Suwalki corridor to the Baltic and the Black Sea.
THE RISK OF A US DISENGAGEMENT
Making the picture even more delicate is the increasingly discussed possibility of a reduction of the American role. Even a partial withdrawal – through a reduction of troops or a less automatic commitment to Article 5 – could generate strategic ambiguities and increase the risk of miscalculations.
According to the Polish analysis, a NATO without the United States would not simply be a weaker alliance, but “a profoundly different organization, lacking its main military, nuclear, and political guarantor.” For Central Europe, this would translate into “an immediate loss of deterrent capability” against Russia.
In this scenario, the countries of the region would be pushed to accelerate rearmament, strengthen regional cooperation, and rely more on European powers. But none of these options, Michnik concludes, represents an equivalent alternative to the role played by the United States in recent decades. The most concrete risk is not a sudden collapse of NATO, but rather its gradual transformation into a less cohesive and less predictable alliance, with security guarantees increasingly negotiable. A path that is being watched with concern in countries that, having left the Warsaw Pact after the collapse of communist regimes in 1989, had hoped to have found definitive security under the umbrella of the Atlantic Alliance.
