‘Closer to a break than ever’: Can NATO survive if Trump pulls the US out?

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) faces its most severe existential crisis in decades as former U.S. President Donald Trump's potential return to power in Washington raises the specter of a U.S. withdrawal from the alliance. This profound uncertainty, exacerbated by the ongoing conflict in Iran which has deepened transatlantic rifts, has led analysts and diplomats to question whether the 75-year-old military pact can survive without its principal military and financial backer. The core issue revolves around Trump's long-stated skepticism of NATO's value to American interests and his transactional view of international alliances. The immediate catalyst for this heightened anxiety is the war in Iran, a conflict that has starkly exposed divergent strategic priorities and risk appetites between the United States and key European allies like France and Germany. While the U.S. has taken a more confrontational stance, European capitals have emphasized de-escalation and diplomatic channels, creating friction within the alliance's unified command structure. This disagreement over Iran acts as a stress test, revealing cracks that a Trump administration could exploit to justify a reduced commitment or even initiate withdrawal procedures, a move he publicly contemplated during his first term. Historically, NATO's cohesion has been underpinned by the U.S. security guarantee and its overwhelming contribution to collective defense. A U.S. exit would not only cripple the alliance's military capabilities but also trigger a fundamental reordering of European security, potentially forcing the European Union to rapidly develop an independent defense pillar. While some argue this could strengthen European strategic autonomy in the long term, the immediate effect would be a period of dangerous vulnerability and geopolitical instability, with adversaries like Russia likely to test the alliance's fractured resolve. The question is no longer about marginal adjustments to burden-sharing but about the very survival of the post-World War II security architecture.