European officials have been engaged in an intensive campaign to keep the United States committed to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as tensions over the Iran war strain transatlantic ties. On Friday, the White House announced it would withdraw 5,000 U.S. troops from Germany. While the substance of that decision did not come as a surprise to NATO circles, the abruptness and political framing of the move have unsettled governments in Europe.
Officials in Brussels and national capitals had anticipated an American push for greater European responsibility for regional security. In that sense, the drawdown of troops aligned with a broader expectation that Europe would shoulder more of its defence burden. More sensitive for Germany was Washington’s abandonment of a plan to base long-range Tomahawk missiles on German soil. That change, though unwelcome in Berlin, was not wholly unforeseen: the deployment plan had been agreed under President Joe Biden and U.S. Tomahawk inventories have been drawn down in the course of the U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran.
What caused deeper alarm among European policy-makers was not the numerical scale of the troop reduction but the political signal that accompanied it. The decision was announced with limited prior notification or consultation with allied governments, and U.S. officials publicly linked the action to President Trump’s displeasure with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s criticism of American conduct in the Iran conflict. Those dynamics prompted sharp reactions in Germany and beyond.
"What is worrying is not the figure of 5,000 troops, but the political signal from Washington that longstanding, absolutely reliable partnerships no longer seem to count for anything and appear to be subject to arbitrary decisions," said Siemtje Moeller, a senior lawmaker from Germany's Social Democrats, who are part of Merz's governing coalition.
The troop withdrawal followed public accusations by President Trump that U.S. allies had not done enough to back Washington in the Iran war. He has even suggested that such failures could undermine Washington's obligation to invoke Article 5, the alliance’s mutual defence clause. At the same time, the president pushed the alliance to the brink over an unrelated episode in which he threatened to take Greenland from Denmark, a fellow NATO member. That particular crisis was eased in part by Mark Rutte, referred to in Washington communications as NATO Secretary General, but the underlying tensions remain unresolved.
European diplomats say they are concerned the U.S. president may take further steps that test NATO cohesion ahead of a planned summit of the alliance's 32 national leaders in Ankara in July, particularly if the Iran war persists and grievances in Washington against allies remain acute. A senior European diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: "The longer game for NATO and European allies is getting through Ankara. We need to do things with the Americans if we can, and without them if we must."
Efforts to keep the U.S. engaged
Defence experts acknowledge that Europe has limited options: the continent depends heavily on the United States to deter any potential Russian aggression. For that reason, many European capitals have invested diplomatic and practical resources in persuading the White House of the utility of close partnership within NATO.
Part of that outreach has involved quietly facilitating U.S. military operations associated with the Iran campaign. European officials say numerous countries have honoured agreements to allow U.S. forces access to bases and airspace, even when domestic public sentiment is sharply against the war and officials are reluctant to advertise such cooperation. Spain, however, has publicly banned the use of bases on its territory for those operations.
Prime Minister Mark Rutte stated that countries including Britain, Croatia, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Montenegro, Portugal and Romania are delivering on their commitments to support U.S. operations. Beyond operational access, European diplomats are making a broader case to President Trump, other U.S. officials, members of Congress and Republican-leaning think tanks that it is in American interests to remain fully engaged with NATO. Their messaging highlights plans for a possible post-war mission in the Strait of Hormuz, underscores both the military and economic value of European allies, and seeks to demonstrate that Europe is taking on a larger role inside the alliance.
Divisions among European leaders
Despite a shared interest in preserving the alliance, the crisis over the Iran war has exposed sharp differences among European NATO members over tone and tactics. Leaders of several Western European countries, notably Spain, France and Germany, have voiced blunt criticism of the war and of American policy, a stance that mirrors domestic public opinion but risks provoking the president's anger. By contrast, Mr. Rutte has publicly said he considers anti-war rhetoric to be counterproductive.
Diplomats note that several eastern European allies, worried that any weakening of NATO would embolden Russia, share the view that maintaining a united front and avoiding partisan public denunciations is the safer course. Speaking about his conversations with other leaders and with Washington, Rutte told the "What the Hell is Going on" podcast, hosted by the American Enterprise Institute, that after meeting President Trump in Washington last month he was irritated by countries saying "this is not our war." He said: "When European countries are saying 'this is not our war', it irritated the hell out of me."
Rutte also told reporters at a summit of European leaders in Armenia that "European leaders have gotten the message, they’ve heard the message from the U.S. loud and clear." He added that several countries were "pre-positioning essential logistical and other support" such as minehunters and minesweepers near the Gulf to prepare for a possible Strait of Hormuz mission once active hostilities end.
In practical terms, the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany have said they will dispatch ships that could contribute to such a mission. France, which is leading planning alongside Britain, already has vessels in the Middle East that could be made available.
Outlook
European officials are pursuing parallel tracks: they are quietly facilitating U.S. operations where possible, publicly signalling a willingness to increase European contributions to security, and engaging with American institutions and audiences to make a strategic case for continued U.S. engagement in NATO. Yet the episode over troop reductions in Germany highlights the limits of those efforts. The speed and political tone of the U.S. decision have intensified doubts about the predictability of Washington's commitments, and have underlined how allied trust can be strained by unilateral moves.
With a NATO summit in Ankara on the calendar for July, diplomats and defence planners are bracing for the prospect that bilateral tensions could flare again. Much of European policy-making over the next weeks will be aimed at preventing further unilateral actions that could erode alliance cohesion, while preparing contingencies for increased European-led activity in maritime theatres such as the Strait of Hormuz.