BRUSSELS — Hours after U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth scolded his NATO colleagues and said the Pentagon would take stock of their performance, leaders of various European nations were reviewing a checklist of progress on security priorities.
What Hegseth was really telling the Europeans was what they already knew.
The list included their jump in defense spending, investment in industry to boost the manufacture of military equipment, best use of lessons acquired from the battle in Ukraine and the necessity to buy or create drones, air defense systems and long-range missiles.
At a summit ending Friday, they discussed how to effectively use joint European Union financing and eliminate red tape to hasten purchases, weighed the state of “military mobility” to quicken the deployment of troops and equipment, and enhance ports and airports.
They repeated that “Europe’s defense readiness must be decisively ramped up by 2030.” Not a new list, but something they have been working on since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia in 2022.
Intelligence services have warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin could strike elsewhere in Europe before the end of the decade, especially if he wins Ukraine. Already they accuse Russia of sabotage and disinformation all over Europe.
Two-thirds of EU member states are also in NATO’s ranks, and the extra unpredictability of the Trump administration has further encouraged them to go it alone. It was only the latest jolt in Hegseth’s Pentagon review.
Pentagon chief slams US allies
Hegseth doesn’t attend many NATO meetings and he departed Thursday’s defense ministers gathering early. But his big first speech to the allies in February 2025, and his follow up last week were remarkable.
On Thursday he called NATO a “paper-tiger,” saying allies had been “shameful” and that “too many failed” a test handed to them by President Donald Trump when he sought use of their facilities in Europe to launch assaults on Iran.
He even mocked their focus on “gender equity and climate change” and blasted their migration plans.
Hegseth then given them six months to get their act together for a Pentagon performance evaluation that ties the presence of U.S. military in Europe and American investment in NATO to whether he believes they are pulling their weight.
“It’s protection racket framing that undermines NATO solidarity, trust in the U.S. commitment to NATO, and, ultimately, U.S. security interests,” said Rachel Ellehuus, Director-General of think-tank the Royal United Services Institute.
Terms of review are unknown What the review actually entails is unclear.
“It will be designed to make sure that NATO is moving fast and irreversibly toward Europe leading, stepping up to take primary responsibility for the defense of Europe,” said Hegseth. “Some countries will fail, others will pass with flying colors.”
It could be “up to six months, could be less,” he said, and involve U.S. military commanders, members of Congress and the allies themselves.
Their performance will determine U.S. payments into a combined NATO budget that operates its headquarters and other facilities, he added. “Our dues contributions will go down where other allies don’t spend with urgency.” Hegseth stated.
He told reporters at Brussels airport before heading out it will also deal with “where is the right place for basing. Where can we be assured we have access and overflight when we need it, so that America is properly postured on the continent.”
NATO played no active role in the Iran war but did protect alliance territories from probable invasion.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte had no idea what Hegseth’s evaluation would include.
“We still don’t know what the final outcome will be, because that depends on the review. So, we’ll see what happens.” He added, “Wherever we can be helpful, we will be helpful.” Rutte may learn a little more when he visits Washington next week.
Numbers show US friends are doing pretty well Rutte said European allies and Canada are doing a good job, but “they can always do more.”
What we’re witnessing is astonishing quantities of money pouring in,” he told reporters. “Europe and Canada in 2025 are spending more than $90 billion more than 2024, which is an increase in defense spending of almost 20%
Now the extra money has to be translated into more military equipment, guns and ammo.
At their meeting last year the allies decided to raise their military budgets to the US level in terms of gross domestic product. Trump emerged from the conference a pleased man, calling his NATO counterparts a “nice group of people.” But the evaluation is not a good sign for their next summit in Turkey on July 7-8.
Still, the top European military officers now have expanded command roles at NATO, and U.S. allies have taken the lead in funneling equipment and money into Ukraine as the Trump administration has stood back.
Some Europeans and Canada also are paying billions to purchase key air defence systems from the United States that they gift to Ukraine, whose war with Russia they view as an existential threat to Europe.
Indeed, it is hard to see what more could be done, and done faster, unless perhaps it would be to give America unlimited access to their airspace and bases on their land to wage its wars elsewhere.
“Force posture should be driven by detailed threat assessments, operational requirements and military planning – not used as a form of reward, punishment or revenge,” said Ellehuus, a former top U.S. counselor at NATO.
“Such framing undercuts allies while they are actively addressing the problem and tells adversaries that U.S. security commitments come with a price tag,” she added.
