Until recently, NATO was believed to be the only military alliance in history to have defeated its archenemy without firing a single bullet. However, since 2022, NATO has experienced a massive existential crisis because of the war in Ukraine and its lack of a unified response to the increased threat from Russia. Not only has it started outsourcing its security responsibilities to other actors, such as the European Union, but its leaders have also closed their eyes to the war in Ukraine increasingly spilling over into NATO territory and failed to properly respond. The US has adopted a different approach to NATO’s eastern flank since Donald Trump’s election in November 2024. The new administration favors Kissingerian shuttle diplomacy over Biden’s policy of supporting Ukraine as long as it takes and objects to European member states’ failure to take responsibility for European security.
An exciting, dynamic debate unfolding within NATO since the beginning of 2025 regards its future leadership. The appointment of the new secretary general of NATO in 2025 was a convenient choice for the Trump administration and was contested by Central European and Balkan states, who objected to his historically pro-Russian or very pragmatic policies. Another criticism of Rutte is that, like several of his predecessors, he became NATO’s top representative by playing it safe and being an obedient bureaucrat, an uncharismatic follower, not a leader who would question the most powerful states.
The recently published National Security Strategy also indicates that the US’s engagement in Europe is changing, and the influence of NATO’s secretary general will be limited and deeply dependent on Washington. The general feeling in Europe is that with a weakened NATO and spineless leaders like Rutte, who obeys the Trump administration, Europe could expose itself to even more military provocations, active measures, cognitive warfare, and disinformation from adversaries. Russia clearly seeks to escalate its sharp power operations, including the war in Ukraine, which directly affect European interests.
The US’s commitment to a free, democratic, and independent Europe was never questioned, so Washington’s call for Europe to take more responsibility for its security should also be seen as an opportunity to do so. It might have been a mistake not to have elected Kaja Kallas, former Estonian prime minister, as NATO secretary general. The current leaders’ ineptitude and their failure to act independently should demonstrate to member states that they must abandon the practice of political appointments so as to favor qualified candidates with courage.
By the same token, if the US entirely withdraws from Europe, European NATO leaders should impeach Rutte because the NATO secretary general’s primary responsibility is not to obsequiously serve Washington’s interests but to strengthen the resolve of all NATO members, even if they pursue isolationist policies.
