The Pros and Cons of Leaving NATO

Author: Sage Wong

        The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was initially founded during the Cold War to provide security for European nations against the Soviet Union. During the Cold War, US foreign policy focused on stopping the spread of communism. This included fighting in the Korean and Vietnam wars and sending aid to post-war Europe through the Marshall Plan to prevent communist uprisings. After the cold-war ended, NATO shifted its purpose to being a “cooperative-security” organization – dedicated to protecting its members in North America and Europe from any foreign attacks. Two key NATO articles are 4 and 5: Article 4 allows members to discuss the best response if a nation’s security is threatened, while Article 5 considers an attack on one member as an attack on all. Article 5 has been invoked only once, after the September 11 attacks, which killed 3,000 people in the US. However, the current president, Donald Trump, has called for the withdrawal of the US from NATO due to reasons such as other countries not devoting enough of their GDP to military funding, and the requirement that the US would have to defend each of NATO’s member states, a contrast to his America first approach. First, this essay will cover the disadvantages of leaving NATO, and next, this essay will cover the advantages of leaving NATO.

        Some reasons for the US staying in NATO include the fact that it serves as a deterrent against more war, strengthens US political influence, and finances related to NATO operations burdens are shared amongst member states. Having major European powers like France, Germany, and Great Britain to band together alongside the US, the world’s greatest economy in terms of GDP and military in terms of spending to defend smaller European nations and each other will reduce the chance of any foreign nation attacking them. The prospect of facing a strong allied group of nations in theory should result in fewer wars. And this has been true. No European nation has ever had to invoke article 5 for their safety since the establishment of NATO, so time can say that it’s working. NATO also strengthens US political influence. The US is a very globalized nation – it relies on international trade and alliances for a lot of its economy. By having membership in NATO, this indirectly leads to improved trade and relationships with European countries and Canada. The US does benefit from a worldwide influence – it has been able to spread important American ideas like democracy and free trade to many corners of the world. And by staying in NATO, it is committing to this international stance. Lastly, military operations cost less when sharing them amongst countries. NATO and other countries assisted the US by providing around 41,000 troops to Afghanistan in comparison to the US’s 100,000. In terms of military spending alone in Afghanistan, the top 4 NATO countries contributed a combined amount of roughly 65 billion dollars while the US alone contributed 730 billion dollars.

        Some advantages of the US leaving NATO include the fact that because it would save money, other countries are not even meeting their military budget quotas, and there would be a lower risk of a direct nuclear conflict with Russia. NATO’s article 5 requires the US to step in if another nation gets attacked. This will likely result in a war, and wars are very costly both financially and in terms of lives lost. The US spent 2.3 trillion dollars in Afghanistan, lost over 5,000 American lives, and indirectly led to the deaths of over 150,000 Afghans. In addition to all of this, Afghan infrastructure was devastated by the war. Although this was a war initiated by the US, this shows how if another NATO member gets attacked, the US would be obligated to participate in a similar war with similar consequences. On the topic of other NATO members, most of them have not met the NATO spending quota of at least 2% of their GDP in 2023. And in terms of the countries actually benefiting from this arrangement, it is more so the European countries rather than the US. By looking at military power measured by the amount of money put into it, the US has spent 2 times more than the rest of NATO combined. This means that if there is a military conflict, the US would be carrying most of the weight anyways, rendering the need for other countries to be much less significant. There would also be a lower risk of a direct nuclear conflict with Russia as well. Amidst the war in Ukraine, Russia has violated Estonian airspace by sending 3 Russian MiG-31s. NATO has threatened to shoot down these fighter jets the next time an airspace violation happens again. Because the US and Russia own a combined 8,000 nuclear warheads, enough to destroy humanity several times over, any escalation in tension between the US and Russia is vital to preserve this world. 

        At the end of the day, neither solution is perfect. On one hand, if the US leaves NATO, it threatens to lose its strong political and trade relationships with Europe, the financial burden of wars will no longer be shared, and more wars may occur without the strength of the US as a deterrent for invading European countries. On the other hand, if the US stays in NATO, other countries will be unfairly benefiting from the US’s disproportionately large military and economic power, more money will be spent on any potential foreign wars, and we have a greater risk of entering a nuclear war with Russia. So based on this information, it’s up to you to decide which matters more to you. 

Works Cited