America can no longer be relied on for Europe’s defence, the truth is we are alone

November 7, 2024 3:35 pm(Updated 3:48 pm)

Following the Republican Party’s historic victory in the US elections, three i writers ask whether Donald Trump’s America can still be described as leader of the free world. Ian Dunt, Sarah Baxter and Kwasi Kwarteng offer three different perspectives.

In the 40s, the “Free World” was used to describe the alliance of countries fighting fascism in Europe. America’s role has been debated ever since – and the question is more pertinent than ever.

You can read Sarah Baxter’s view here and Kwasi Kwarteng’s here.

We must now realise the truth. It is ugly, it is harrowing, and it should fill every one of us with apprehension. In truth, we should have acknowledged it eight years ago, instead of burying our heads in the sand. But we can, at the very least, acknowledge it now.

America is no longer the ruler of the free world. It is not even currently on the side of the free world. It is on the side of Vladimir Putin and his network of authoritarian gangsters.

More pertinently, America is no longer a reliable security partner. It wouldn’t have mattered if Kamala Harris had won that election on Tuesday. The basic reality would not have changed. Around half the US electorate is prepared to vote for someone who hates the global institutions which make up the post-war order – from the EU, to the World Trade Organisation, the UN, and Nato. Of these, the last is the most acute.

We cannot adapt to this new world until we admit it exists, even if doing so sounds alarmist. The reason it sounds alarmist is because these are alarming times, not because we are overreacting. The truth is this: Europe is alone. Russia is invading a sovereign European state in a war of conquest and we have lost America as a guarantor of security.

For decades, Europe has relied on American defence leadership. Nato has offered a guarantee that an attack on a member state would trigger a military response from the most powerful nation on earth. European defence calculations are based on the presence of US military leadership and capability. Continental protection has been left in the hands of US naval and air forces.

We can no longer rely on the US for our defence any more. Even if the Democrats get back into power in four years, they may be voted out again four years after that.

At his most moderate, Trump says he will be “fundamentally reevaluating Nato’s purpose and Nato’s mission”. At his worst, he says he would encourage Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” to members of the group – a comment which is tantamount to leaving or dismantling it.

So, who will take the American leadership position in Europe? The answer to that should be simple: Great Britain. Along with France, it is the pre-eminent military power on the continent, with a nuclear deterrent. But unlike France, it does not have a pro-Putin far right or far left which could easily take power in coming years.

This is the same problem which besets Germany. It should by right of its size, influence and economic strength have the leadership role. But Alternative for Germany on the far-right and Reason and Justice on the far-left are both pro-Putin and could easily cause an upset in the not-too-distant future. As a country, it is also utterly muddled and inept on this issue. The mainstream left has a naive can’t-we-all-just-get-along relationship with Russia. And Olaf Scholz has proved a hapless, confused chancellor whom no one could rightly rely on, on this matter or any other.

The moment has fallen to us. Through some strange and unforeseeable combination of factors, Britain has been handed the leadership position it has longed for. This role is vast: not just a guardian of Europe against Russian tyranny, but guarantor of liberal democracy around the world when it is most under threat. This is the type of role we pride ourselves on, which we have defined ourselves by since the days of the Second World War.

Read Next

The problem is that Britain cannot fulfil this role, because it has left the EU. The European countries which would have once welcomed its leadership in a moment of acute uncertainty will no longer accept it. The relationships Britain needed to cultivate and nurture have crumbled to dust after years of tawdry xenophobia and paranoid gibberish. It must be us. It should be us. But it cannot be us. Brexit has left us lonely and exposed, an irrelevance on the world stage just when we are needed the most.

Only one country truly suits the role of European leadership now. It is Poland.

To many people, this will seem absurd. In Britain we’re used to treating Poles as a problem rather than a solution. It was hysteria over Polish plumbers which apparently encouraged Brexit.

In fact, Poland has a proud military history. It also took defence seriously well before Russia invaded Ukraine. It’s now undertaking the most significant military build up on the continent, setting a goal of 5 per cent defence spending as a percentage of GDP for 2025. It is focused on a land army – precisely what is needed in a Ukraine-era, when defence becomes an exclusively European issue. We are no longer in the business of air and sea supremacy. We are engaged in defensive land power supported by tactical air power.

All of this currently seems unthinkable. It feels absurd. Of course it does. None of us remember what it was like before American leadership.

It would not have seemed unthinkable to our grandparents, who remembered the Second World War before America became involved. We have grown accustomed to asking Washington to handle our security for us. That is no longer a tenable state of affairs.

Even if the next four years pass without a disaster, America can no longer be relied on. Europe must take care of its own problems now. It must have confidence in its own power. And we in the UK must realise, once and for all, that we are part of that story, whether we like it or not.

Ian Dunt is an i columnist and author of “How Westminster Works… And Why It Doesn’t”. He was host of Remainiacs, a British hour-long twice-weekly political podcast about Brexit.

You can read Sarah Baxter’s view here and Kwasi Kwarteng’s here.