What happens if the US leaves NATO?
Some people evidently felt provoked by some previous articles, and went around saying “but if the USA abandons NATO it will be the END! THE ENDEEEEEE!”. The trouble is that the word "end" does not exist in history, history shows situations that evolve. At this point we need to imagine the evolution and consequences.
First, let's repeat again what I already wrote:
In history, the word "END" does not exist
Then let's take the European NATO countries. Tomorrow the USA will leave because Trump says so. Well. Let's see what's missing. Let's start with European countries.
The European structure of NATO would remain there. Pipelines for fuel supplies, energy supplies, logistics, decision centers, etc. would remain where they are. Obviously they wouldn't contain the American part, and things have to be counted.
On a strategic level, both Italy and Germany would certainly immediately lack around 80/90 atomic bombs. The problem here is complex: those bombs were given to stop ongoing nuclear programs .
With the USA gone, an alternative supplier would need to be found. Excluding the English, France remains. Would France offer itself for a problem of sharing the nuclear arsenal? Obvious. Since it would be the most strategic program on the European continent, it would give the French immense weight. Once the idea has started, we can consider Poland, Finland, Sweden, the Baltic states and Italy (and probably Greece) within the French nuclear program. Probably also Holland and Belgium.
The F-35 node remains. Here too the French could offer their fifth generation aircraft, and even in a relatively short time, since it is a best-seller on the market. Ditto for nuclear submarines and nuclear ships, which should be ordered quickly.
Only for bombers, or fourth generation aircraft, could they help the Swedes with the Gripen. It's quite simple to build, perhaps it would also be possible under license. In the world of tanks Italy is out of the running, but there are things like the Centauro II and other vehicles where Italy could well compete. Oto Melara and Finmeccanica are also doing well. Let's say that a lot of money would flow, but more in the tactical sectors.
Having said that, we are talking about a European defense that at least for the next 20 years would have its center in Paris, at least until Berlin changes its strategic culture much. Under these conditions would Putin attack? It depends on how long Paris takes to replace the US in terms of nuclear weapons. If Paris decided to become THE pivot of European defense in the next 20/30 years, it would immediately give nuclear weapons to Poland, Sweden and Finland, and zac. French power begins.
Let's see what the USA loses. They lose all influence on the Baltic Sea, and especially they no longer have European bases in the Mediterranean. It means having completely lost the Mediterranean. They would no longer have many ports where they could stop a fleet, there would no longer be Sigonella and Gioia del Colle, and they could only work in the Mediterranean at tremendous logistical costs.
It means the almost certain end of Israel.
This statement raises eyebrows until one understands why the English sponsored the birth of Israel.
Let's go step by step.
We are in 1914 and the Ottoman Empire exists.
Someone comes and demolishes it. These are the English. Except that a fundamentalist movement emerges (the Muslim Brotherhood) that wants the Ottoman Empire back, plus various types of Arab nationalism. The Nazis, in an anti-English function, feed him well (See BAat'h), and at this point the English have a problem. “How do we prevent the Turks from invading that whole area again and rebuilding an Ottoman empire?”
Result: we do and support Israel. In this way, if that state becomes strong, it will not be possible to rebuild the Ottoman Empire. Well. This is what Israel does. States pervaded by some Arab nationalism attack Israel and lose. The problem seems solved.
Now the English do not exist, and as Israel's allies there are the USA. But if the USA no longer really has any comfort in the Mediterranean, Erdogan leaves with his 900,000 men already in service plus reservists and a possible levy, and will remake the Ottoman Empire. Egypt falls immediately because the Muslim Brotherhood is very strong, Syria and Tunisia are a walk in the park. Perhaps Algeria will fall too: after all, by then Erdogan would be very popular throughout the Islamic world.
I always hate to say it, but the exit of the USA from NATO implies the disappearance of Israel . I don't know what would happen to the population, but the behavior of the Hamas militiamen does not bode well . I doubt we would have a big refugee problem.
Again, Russia. The "army" that attacked Ukraine, for now, is unable to conquer any Poland or any Romania. Both nations have armies far superior to the Ukrainian one (not that it takes much, but Romania and Poland are very well armed today). Furthermore, the territory (especially in Romania) is very different. Even on the Baltic, the three small countries are now under the umbrella of any air base built in Sweden or Finland. They would risk a humiliating defeat, and the immediate loss of Kaliningrad.
It doesn't make sense, and it doesn't work. Sic et simpliciter.
And this is only considering Russia as an autonomous country. If we consider them for what they are becoming, that is, a puppet in the hands of Beijing, the war could also end immediately, to open the way to China-Europe land trade. In this case the Chinese would make the Suez Canal unlivable, they would reopen the land routes via Russia, and they would close the deal with a partition of Ukraine.
I'll be very honest: in general, the Americans would lose much more. They would be cut off from Mediterranean affairs, i.e. North Africa, the Middle East and the Balkans. Certainly, twenty years of very rapid strategic transformations would begin, in which Paris would be the favorite to become the military center. But surprises can happen if the Germans were to set up a military nuclear program. Since the shock would be very strong, nothing can be ruled out.
But I honestly don't see this disaster for us: as I repeat, even with what we know and without hypotheses, the Brancaleone army that we saw in Ukraine cannot overcome either Romania or Poland. They could attack the Czech Republic, and aim for Fulda, but this wouldn't be a walk in the park either and they would risk a significant salient.
However, it would be a very interesting twenty years to decide who replaces the USA as arms suppliers. The countries that produce a lot of weapons, excluding the UK, in Europe are France, Germany, Italy and Sweden. They all have systems of excellence in different areas, and therefore the competition would immediately become very interesting, because it would bring with it just as many political changes.
On the Mediterranean level, the great gendarmes would remain Spain, France and Italy as a navy, balanced by a notable Turkish threat. Turkey has a notable fleet, in fact. And here there would be a lot to play for especially in the Aegean Sea.
But if anything it would be a beginning, not an end.
One might wonder what the effects of this loss of control would be on the US economy: the Middle East and Africa are already subject to considerable Chinese influence, and with an entirely European birthplace, with less US political influence, one wonders which outlet markets would remain with the Americans themselves.
Uriel Fanelli
The blog is visible from Fediverso by following:
Contacts:
- Fediverse: @ uriel@fedi.keinpfusch.net
- MATRIX: @uriel:mtrx.keinpfusch.net
- GNU JAMI: Ufanelli