Why Europe isn't ready for a second Trump term

during Donald Trump's term as US president he complained a lot about this chart it shows that America's allies in NATO were spending less than 2% of their GDP on their militaries that frustrated Trump because back in 2014 every NATO member agreed to reach that Target by 2024 yet 3 years later most weren't even close so Trump began threatening to pull the us out of NATO this is not fair to the people and taxpayers of the United States NATO members must finally contribute Trump's threats and Russia's invasion of Ukraine convince more members to reach the target

but as he runs for a second term people that used to work for him believe he'll really withdraw from NATO this time while people who will likely work with him are making plans for how to do it all while Trump drops pretty strong hints himself one of the presidents of a big country stood up said well sir uh if we don't pay and we're attacked by Russia will you protect us I said no I would not protect you in fact I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want you got to pay it

means that in a second Trump term the US May finally leave Europe alone to defend itself and that is causing some Panic most European leaders really would not like to see his return we know from the first Trump Administration that things can happen unexpectedly this is a real possibility so how much does Europe's security really depend on the United States and can Europe survive if it [Music] leaves after World War II the US was tired of fighting in Europe twice in the last 40 years our country has thrown its full economic and military power into

a deadly struggle to prevent the Triumph of a dangerous aggressor in Western Europe but it was worried that it would have to again the Soviet Union had seized control of Eastern Europe and was threatening to take over the West too these countries had ruined economies little trust for each other and their tired militaries were no match for the Soviets but instead of leaving a vulnerable Europe to fend for itself the US decides to help protect it at least until it could defend itself it gives these countries $13 billion to rebuild and encourages them to trade

together then the US joins them in a military Alliance NATO where every member pledges to help in the event that one of them is attacked meaning the Soviets would need to be willing to take on all these countries plus the [Music] US to prove it was serious the US bases some of its own troops weapons and even nuclear bombs inside European countries more than a million men have been added to the Armed Forces of the European members through NATO the comminus have not gained an inch of ter territory in Europe since the treaty was signed

defending Europe was expensive but it did have its benefits the US economy boomed thanks to exporting materials to Europe over the next few decades European countries recover and NATO expands but the US doesn't leave there were tensions from the war about the idea of Germany rearming States wanted to do different things they were all still rebuilding in a lot of debt and so the US kind of ends up staying in order to smooth all of that over the of the Soviet Union in 1991 gives the us another chance to step back no country was threatening

to take over Western European countries and most of them had grown rich but instead the US pushes to invite more countries into NATO thereby extending its protection to more of Europe Bill Clinton in the 1990s um really wanted to appeal to voters of Eastern European origin in swing States and the idea that if the US were to pull back from Europe maybe the Europeans would go their own way and that was something we didn't want despite the new members the US does reduce the number of troops it has in Europe the problem was so did

Europe they dramatically cut defense spending largely in service of expanding social programs that the European states in the 1990s basically take a much larger peace dividend to the point today where I would say that relationship is extremely unbalanced this imbalance is at the heart of Trump's argument against NATO and this election cycle he's including the war in Ukraine in that arguing the US should send less military aid and push Russia and Ukraine to negotiate an end to the war it's this kind of story that the media can tend to oversimplify in order to cover it

responsibly I need to know both sides of the story and I love using ground news for that and I'm thrilled to have them sponsor another episode ground news is a website a browser plugin and an app that aims to make consuming the news more transparent it compiles new sources from all over the world in one place and allows you to compare their bias their reliability and who owns them that's huge for international stories like this one right now Ukrainian President Vladimir zalinski is visiting US President Joe Biden to present his plan to end the war

ground news's headline comparison tool shows me that the left leading Publications like Channel 4 tend to highlight the urgency and pressure to act while a Democrat is still in office and right leing Publications such as these focus more on what zelinsky's demands are and the political ramifications of them ground news is a crucial tool for my work and I know that you want the same level of understanding and depth in your news feeds so right now you can go to ground. news/ search party and get 40% off their Vantage plan that's what I use all

the features will be unlocked again that's ground. news/ search party ground news and I share the same Mission that's to make the news more transparent and understandable for everybody so I want to thank ground news again for sponsoring search party now let's take you back to the episode I have been very very direct with secretary Stenberg and members of the alliance Trump likes to point to this chart as evidence that the US is doing more than its fair share but tends to misinterpret it in a few ways over the last eight years the United States

spent more in defense than all other NATO countries combined first this isn't money the US is paying NATO it's what the US spends on its own military which is a lot higher than Europe because well the US military is a lot bigger he also misunderstands what these gaps are and many of these nations owe massive amounts of money from past years and not paying in those past years this isn't money that countries owe the us but money they promise to spend on their own militaries and in the last few years many have made that up

but while Trump's wrong about some of these specifics he's correct that the US still contributes a significant amount to Europe's defense so this was another one of those fact checks where you end up with you know multiple pinocchios but you're not really getting it the the meat of the issue if you look at the actual forces um that are in place in Europe the US is still by far the biggest contributor today the US has 100,000 troops in Europe more than most European armies most countries have some Advanced weapons but the US provides a lot

including some key things like long-range missiles heavy lift and refueling aircraft and intelligence technology and while the UK and France have nuclear weapons it's still us nukes that serve as the ultimate deterrence shielding NATO from an attack in other words the US is still the glue that holds together Europe's defense if the US were to just vanish tomorrow European States you know very wealthy industrially Advanced Etc um but they couldn't immediately fill those roles there is not I would say a single European military that could do everything that the US can do these capabilities are

why the US took the lead when Russia ignited another war in Europe since 2022 the US has sent more military aid to Ukraine than all the countries in the European Union combined many weapons that Europe pledged to donate were found to be defective old and broken revealing just how weak Europe had led its militaries become even though helping Ukraine is in the US's interest Trump is still viewing it in terms of money spent and money owed we're in for 250 billion or more because they don't ask Europe which is a much bigger beneficiary to getting

this thing done they should be forced to equalize this was a dangerous misunderstanding alliances are not just about money most American Presidents going back the 1950s would say that a stable and secure Europe is a vital American National interest I don't think Mr Trump understands that Trump is far from the first US president to feel frustrated that Europe is falling short but he is the first to threaten to leave NATO because of it so it's worth a close examination on exactly what that would look like and I'll start by noting that he can't legally do

it on his own in 2023 US Congress passed a bill barring the president from withdrawing from from NATO without its approval but Trump can leave NATO without officially leaving NATO and some of the people that may work with him are working out plans on how to do just that one Trump Ally suggested that NATO adopt a new policy where members who spend more than 2% aren't obligated to help members who don't this would almost certainly violate the original NATO treaty another plan calls for Trump to pull US troops out of Eastern Europe and leave only

some Naval and air power to create a so-called dormant NATO that the only gets involved within an emergency and in Project 2025 conservative analysts and former Trump officials argue that Trump should transform NATO so that Europe only relies on the US for its nukes and a select number of other capabilities it's either going to be some sort of pay for protection deal or it's going to be a some level of us pull back I don't really see much in between those two options for for Trump trump hasn't endorsed any of these plans but European leaders

are still nervous that if he does win and pulls the us back it'll leave them dangerously unprepared without US troops European NATO members don't have enough to defend themselves against an invasion from a full-size Russian army while they have 1.9 million soldiers combined a recent analysis found that they would struggle to get more than 300,000 ready to fight and in the past few years many European militaries have shrunk because they can't find enough recruits Europe would also have trouble replacing the aircraft longrange weapons and intelligence technology that only the US makes and without us nuclear

weapons other countries may feel compelled to build their own if those go away Britain and France are nuclear Powers but would Germany need nuclear weapons so I think the absence of the American nuclear deterrent from Europe's defense would lead to some very difficult questions that would take some time to sort out among Europeans it doesn't seem ready to make the hard political decisions yet either governments are already struggling to choose between spending more on defense or protecting their very popular social programs and they still don't agree on how to defend themselves while many Eastern countries

believe Russia is the most serious threat Southern countries tend to be more concerned with controlling migration the fact is Europe needs more time to figure this out and Trump may not give it to them when they need time but it's like turning a super tanker the worst thing could be is that Trump says Europe is a rich they can do it on their own we're getting out it's up to them Trump threatened to abandon nature he encouraged Putin to invade our allies we understand the importance of the greatest military Alliance the world has ever known

which is NATO Trump's opponent kamla Harris has suggested that she'll stick to the status quo I will stand strong with Ukraine and our NATO allies but there is reason to think that keeping the status quo would also be a mistake because there's a chance Europe May suddenly have to defend itself even if is's president over the last few decades China's built a powerful military and is threatening to start a war possibly with Taiwan a US Ally the US has been steadily moving more of its military there to deter it but if China were to suddenly

attack the us would have to shift much of what it has in Europe there too which is why it's important to keep pushing Europe to prepare there's going to have to be an impetus that creates this change we do not want a Biden Administration style approach where we you know reassure Europeans that the US is always going to be there even if there's a crisis in Asia or the Middle East m is confident they can do it if given enough time if we're talking 5 to 15 years and we're not talking one year I think

Europeans could fill most of the Gap a few European leaders have taken the lead the Baltic states who border Russia have long urged NATO members to boost their defense spending Poland wants to raise the target to 3% of GDP and French president Emanuel macron has even suggested forming a European Army or at least a more muscular Europe but it's past time for the rest of Europe to join them and the US by contributing so much to their defense should use its leverage to push them to not suddenly pull it away I think that a more

equal us European Defense relationship would be a very good thing and I would prefer to see it happen in a reasonable phased approach that doesn't leave everybody worse off all right that's our episode thanks for watching this is the first of two US election related videos we're going to do so in a couple weeks we're going to do an episode about kamla Harris and look into one of her weaknesses as she runs for president if you haven't subscribed yet to Serge party now is your chance I'd love to hear what kind of stories you want

to hear on this channel we cover Sports and geopolitics but I'm really interested in anything that mixes the two so leave me a comment uh shoot me an email or a tweet and uh I'm looking forward to seeing what kind of ideas you guys come up with thanks again for watching and we see you in a couple weeks