In a world marked by rapid geopolitical shifts, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) faces an existential challenge that is reshaping its role and standing on the international stage. The executive orders of US President Donald Trump for 2025, coupled with the complexities of the Ukrainian-Russian war and trade disputes with allies, are factors that threaten the cohesion of the alliance, which has been a cornerstone of European security for 75 years. How can NATO survive this multifaceted storm?
The Current Landscape: Divisions Exacerbated by Trump’s Radical Decisions
In March 2025, Trump issued an executive order freezing all US military aid to Ukraine, valued at over a billion dollars, following a heated confrontation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House. This decision was seen as a “slap in the face” to European allies, who had significantly increased their support for Ukraine, leading to a deep fracture in Western unity. Internal documents reveal that the suspension of aid will persist until Kyiv commits to “serious initiatives” for negotiations with Russia, a condition that analysts interpret as favoring the Kremlin’s narrative.
This move is part of a broader pattern. Since returning to the White House, Trump has questioned NATO’s role, reiterating his famous statement about “Europeans bearing a greater share of the burden.” His recent comments praised Vladimir Putin’s intelligence, while referring to Zelenskyy as a “dictator,” marking a remarkable shift from the traditional Western stance.
The Ukrainian War: A Volatile Eastern Front and Fragile Peace Accelerators
On the ground, Russia continues to extend its control in Donbas, with British intelligence estimating over 1,500 Russian soldiers lost daily. Despite these losses, Russian forces have made gradual but consistent progress toward Pokrovsk, benefiting from a numerical superiority that Kyiv struggles to counter without continuous Western support.
In response to Trump’s freezing of aid, Zelenskyy presented a new peace plan, focusing on:
An immediate cessation of aerial bombardments (banning long-range strikes and drones).
A prisoner exchange.
A maritime truce conditioned on Russia’s withdrawal from critical waterways.
However, experts are skeptical about the feasibility of this initiative. According to analysts at Chatham House, Russia views any European military presence in Ukraine as a “red line,” weakening the chances of deploying international peacekeeping forces.
Economic Consequences: A Trade War Threatening Internal Cohesion
The divisions within NATO extend beyond the Ukrainian issue. In March 2025, Trump imposed a 25% tariff on Canadian imports worth $107 billion, accusing Ottawa of “facilitating fentanyl smuggling.” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau retaliated with similar tariffs on American goods, warning of a potential loss of one million jobs in industries such as automobiles. While this trade war may appear separate from NATO’s concerns, it erodes trust among allies and provides Russia and China with opportunities to exploit these internal disagreements.
Future Scenarios: Between Disintegration and Reinvention
- Conditional Cohesion Scenario:
Increased European defense spending to 3% of GDP (up from 2.1% in 2024).
The creation of a “European Funding Authority” to support Ukraine in the event of continued American reluctance. - Geopolitical Transformation Scenario:
A Franco-German alliance forming a “European defense pole” that runs parallel to NATO, especially as discussions about the possibility of deploying European forces in Ukraine rise.
Gradual Collapse Scenario:
A partial American withdrawal from NATO, transforming it into an “advisory organization” should Trump win a third presidential term in 2028.
Conclusion: A Test of Collective Will
NATO is at a historic crossroads. Recent decisions by the United States are not just temporary policies, but reflect a deep shift in Washington’s geopolitical vision. Europe’s ability to fill the security vacuum and effectively respond to direct Russian threats will determine whether the alliance transitions from an “existential crisis” into a “new phase of strategic adaptation.” In this context, the current crisis may provide an opportunity to redefine the concept of “collective security” in a way that moves away from unilateral dominance.
References:
- NATO’s 2025 challenges: Trump, Ukraine and defense spending
- The US elections and the future of NATO: A scenario analysis
- Arming Ukraine: A closer look at US military aid as Trump freezes further shipments
- Ukraine in maps: Tracking the war with Russia
- What is Ukraine’s new peace plan that Zelenskyy presented to Trump?
- Trudeau hits out at ‘dumb’ tariffs as Trump warns of further hikes against Canada
