Europe’s largest military forces are drawing up plans to take greater responsibility in the defense of Epirus, reducing their US dependence. The proposal they intend to submit to the Donald Trump government includes a gradual transfer of responsibility to Europe over the next five to ten years, according to a Financial Times report.

These discussions aim to avoid the chaos that would cause a unilateral US departure from NATO, which has raised concerns due to Trump’s repeated threats to weaken or abandon the transatlantic alliance, which is responsible for protecting Europe here.

The United Kingdom, France, Germany and the Scandinavian countries are involved in these informal but substantial talks, according to four European officials. Their purpose is to draw up a plan that will carry the financial and military burden on European capitals and to present it to the US before the NATO summit in The Hague in June.

The proposal will include clear commitments to increase defense spending in Europe and the development of military potential in order to persuade Trump to receive a gradual transfer, which will allow the US to focus more on Asia.

The US, which spends more on defense than all other NATO allies together, is the main guarantor of European security.

In addition to the nuclear arsenal, which supports Europe’s defense and involving several European air forces carrying US nuclear weapons, the US has military capabilities that European allies do not hold as they manage air, naval and military and military bases.

Countries such as Germany, France and the United Kingdom have already increased or accelerated the planned increases in their defense spending after Trump’s election, while the EU has developed initiatives to accelerate the military investment of its member states.

However, according to officials, it will take about five to ten years of increasing defense spending to reach European military capabilities at a level that can replace most of the US skills – without including the US nuclear arsenal.

“The increase in spending is the only option we have: weight distribution and shifting US dependence,” one of the officials said. “We start these conversations, but the project is so great that many feel pressured by its scale.”

Although US diplomats have reassured their European counterparts that Trump remains committed to NATO and Article 5 on mutual defense, many European governments are concerned that the White House could quickly reduce his military forces or distant distances.

Some European capitals are hesitant to get involved in talks on weight distribution, fearing that they will encourage the US to move faster, believing that – despite rhetoric – Trump does not intend to make significant changes in his country’s presence in Europe. Others are skeptical of whether his government would even accept a constituted process, given its unpredictable nature.

“You need an agreement with the Americans, but it is not clear if they will be willing to do it,” another official said. “Can you trust them that they will keep it?”
Officials point out the ongoing and regular discussions led by France and the United Kingdom, about the formation of a “alliance of willing” to support Ukraine in the war against Russia and investing in European defense as a sign of the direction. These discussions, which involve more than twelve European military forces, do not include the US.

When asked what a European pillar means within NATO and if possible, a third high -ranking Western official replied: “We are already seeing it now: the United Kingdom and France are taking the initiative to safeguard Ukraine without the Americans.”

NATO officials argue that maintaining the alliance with reduced or zero US involvement is much simpler than the creation of a new structure, given the difficulty of creating or renegotiation of existing military plans for the defense of Epirus, and the objectives of the Epirus and the rules.

Europe’s main defense requires the participation of the United Kingdom and other Atlantic Naval Forces, the Scandinavian countries for Northern Europe and Turkey for southeastern defense, according to officials – a NATO composition already has.

“Even without the United States, NATO provides a structure for European security cooperation,” said Marion Messmer, a senior investigator for international security at Chatham House.

“There are aspects that should be replaced if the US leaves. However, NATO provides a framework for structures and infrastructure that Europeans are truly familiar with … already performs much of the work that should be done from scratch if a different type of structure was created only for European members, “Messmer added.