As Europe faces a shifting U.S. posture and stretched American resources, questions are intensifying about the future of transatlantic security. Can NATO remain a robust alliance if Europe assumes greater responsibility for its own defence? Recent moves, such as the U.S. handing over command of key NATO structures in Naples and Norfolk to European leadership, alongside Europe’s push to ‘Buy European’ and reduce reliance on U.S. defence systems, illustrate both the opportunities and tensions in reshaping the alliance. The political and strategic implications of a more autonomous Europe within the NATO framework are becoming ever clearer, including how European nations can strengthen the alliance without undermining transatlantic unity. From defence industrial priorities to command structures, the focus is on whether NATO can evolve to meet new geopolitical realities and whether the U.S. and Europe can redefine their partnership on more equal terms.
- How can Europe strengthen its defence capabilities while remaining fully committed to NATO, rather than building outside it?
- What reforms are necessary within NATO to reflect the changing balance of responsibility between the U.S. and European members?
- Can NATO maintain cohesion if the U.S. further deprioritises European security, or does Europe need to rethink its strategic independence?
- How do diverging perspectives on defence spending, technology procurement, and industrial autonomy affect the transatlantic relationship?
- What political and strategic mechanisms can prevent tensions from rising as Europe seeks a more assertive role within NATO?
Executive Summary During this panel, Admiral Bauer's central challenge to the European political class was structural: the same national leaders who attend NATO summits and agree on capability targets then return to Brussels and discuss the same strategic questions as if the NATO agreement did not exist, generating political noise without additional military output. General Hodges urged to stop grovelling to the current president, it produces nothing; think long-term; and recognise that the combined economic and military potential of Europe, Canada and the UK dwarfs Russia, the deficit is will, not wealth. Conway-Mouret's perspective on nuclear deterrence framed the question of strategic autonomy not as an anti-American impulse but as the logical consequence of a scenario in which American ITAR restrictions could prevent a European ally from defending its own territory in a conflict Washington had chosen not to join. Maroto identified two structural elephants the EU's 27 competing voices against the single-person decision-making of Xi, Putin and Trump, and the generational cultural shift required to persuade European publics that welfare states without defence are not sustainable. Lucia Yar noted that the political groups loudest in demanding European strategic agency are typically the most opposed to the EU competence reforms that would make it possible. Livestream Link: https://youtube.com/live/wCLFeacz5Bk?feature=share
