In Defense of Atlanticism
By Ignacio Zamorano
Staff Writer
On February 28th, President Trump of the United States and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky held a contentious meeting at the White House in Washington, D.C. In front of cameras that broadcast the tension in the room to the world, Vice President J.D. Vance started verbally attacking Zelensky, whose counter-arguments were deemed by Trump as “disrespectful.” Later, the Trump administration suspended the provision of intelligence and military aid to Ukraine for a week. The decision signalled the gulf between the United States and the European Union on how to deal with Russia’s rogue presence on the international stage. The post-war consensus has been broken, and the Europeans know it. Incoming German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) saw his $1 trillion spending package—centred around increased defence and infrastructure spending—approved by the Bundestag the week before the publishing of this column, with the support of every mainstream German political party—his CDU, his Bavarian allies in the CSU, the SPD, the Greens and the FDP. The European powers—mainly Germany, France, and the United Kingdom—are coming to terms with the reality that the United States under the Trump administration is no reliable ally to the interests the interests of European democracies. President Macron of France has remarked on the need for Europe to be self-sufficient in its defence, with European soldiers and equipment. While those are the continent’s bulwarks against Russian aggression, it is not they who are at greatest risk from the Kremlin; the countries that were formerly behind the Iron Curtain are.
These nations were mostly born under the idea that no imperial power could oppress these peoples into submission. They have shown great interest in their national defence long before Western Europe realized the nature of Russia’s imperial threat. The last time these nations faced tyranny from foreign powers, Moscow, was when they were behind the Iron Curtain.
Nowadays, Eastern Europe has taken the lead in defence spending, driven by the geographic reality of sharing a border with the aggressor. Poland currently leads NATO in defence spending in terms of GDP percentage, standing at 4.1%. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are the only three other countries in the alliance that can rival American defence spending, with the four countries at a defence spending share of around 3% of GDP, vastly more significant than the alliance’s target of a minimum of 2%. To replace the void American leadership has left in the continent, the leaders of the Western European powers should look at Eastern Europe’s approach to the continent’s threat.
What is in danger for the superpower is much deeper than the projection of its military might against its Russian foes; it is its status as “the shining city on a hill” that has aided and inspired peoples around the world in their struggles for liberty, from Woodrow Wilson to Ronald Reagan. One can hope it is not a shift that sustains itself over time, but the Central and Eastern European nations cannot rely on hope for their national defence; for them, it is a battle for national survival.