America pays, Europe plays: End the NATO gravy train

Published August 27, 2026 7:00am ET



Let’s separate the facts from the fiction as to whether the United States should leave NATO.

NATO, a military alliance aimed primarily at defending Western Europe against aggression from the Soviet Union and its satellite countries after World War II, was created on April 4, 1949, to guarantee the freedom and security of its members, which currently stands at 32 countries located in Europe and North America. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union on Dec. 26, 1991, and the end of the Warsaw Pact military alliance on July 1, 1991, NATO has remained a bulwark against Russian aggression. But has NATO outlived its usefulness from a U.S. perspective?

Each NATO member is currently committed to spending at least 2% of its gross domestic product annually on national defense, with a new target, agreed in June 2025, of 5% of GDP by 2035 (composed of 3.5% for core defense and 1.5% for broader defense and security). As highlighted by President Donald Trump during his 2016 presidential campaign, historically, few members met their 2% spending requirement. In 2016, only five NATO member countries, led by far by the U.S. at 3.6% of GDP, met their 2% spending obligation. In addition, the U.S. accounted for $664 billion (or over 72%) of the approximately $918 billion of total NATO defense expenditures in 2016. At the urging of Trump and with the obvious threat posed by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, in 2026, all 32 NATO member countries are projected to meet (or exceed) the 2% spending threshold, with the U.S. spending about $1.03 trillion (far exceeding any other country and the spending by all other member nations combined at almost 57% of total expected NATO expenditures) of the roughly anticipated $1.81 trillion overall.

Following World War II, Western Europe was in a weakened state and was facing a heavily armed and threatening Russia and its Eastern Bloc allies. This dynamic no longer exists. While Russia remains a significant threat, the former Eastern Bloc has disintegrated, with much of it joining Western European countries in NATO. This realignment of nations means that a greater number of European countries are now banded together in NATO to repel a Russian advance, while Russia stands relatively alone.

As the European members of NATO are most at risk of a Russian attack, you might think that these countries would have used the intervening years since World War II to build up their respective militaries, but most took a different approach. Instead, these European countries generally piggybacked off the U.S. nuclear umbrella and financial support for NATO and, in an ironic twist, put their resources into social programs under their ideology of so-called democratic socialism, a sort of “communism lite,” which has much in common with the philosophy of the former Soviet Union and its satellite countries, the foe NATO was originally designed to repel.

In addition, in another ironic twist, many of these same European nations formed the European Union, a political and economic organization that often acts against the interests of the U.S., while America continues to provide the bulk of the funding for NATO and security for most of the member countries of the EU.

Further, many member nations of NATO have individually taken positions against or detrimental to the U.S. A good example of this less than supportive behavior has been on display recently as no NATO member country has joined with the U.S. in its conflict with Iran, even though the flow of Middle Eastern oil is far more important to European countries than it is to the U.S. Spain closed its airspace to U.S. military aircraft involved in operations in Iran, which included refusing to let the U.S. use joint military bases located in the country. Similarly, Italy denied U.S. strategic bombers headed toward the American clash with Iran permission to land at an airbase in Sicily.

While Europe continues to decline globally in power and influence, it fails to recognize its reliance on the U.S., both militarily with respect to the Russian threat and economically on the world stage, and engages in anti-American acts in foreign affairs, business, and otherwise. Instead of acting in concert with the U.S., it generally behaves like a petulant child would with respect to its parents.

In addition, as many countries in Europe have embraced socialism, the U.S. has maintained a more democratic and capitalist position, making it clear that the two parties have gone in opposite directions ideologically.

The NATO alliance, which was originally intended to act as a shield against the potential aggression of Russia and its Eastern Bloc allies following World War II, has outlived its usefulness to the U.S., at least in its present form. The time has come for European nations to pay for their own defense from the Russian threat and not rely on the U.S. for their security. The U.S. cannot rely on its NATO allies in its time of need and should no longer foot the bill for the security of Europe, with the savings to America being used for other purposes at a time of increasing national debt.

THE MIDDLE EAST JUST BUILT ITS OWN NATO — AND SIGNED AMERICA’S EXIT TICKET

While the U.S. totally abandoning Europe would probably not be the best course for America and clearly not for Europe, a realignment within NATO or an altered relationship outside of NATO between the U.S. and European nations with respect to the continent’s defense is in order.

In summation, we must consider the facts and not be fooled by the fiction.

Perry V. Kalajian is an attorney, consultant, analyst, and national media personality.