Pentagon chief announces review of US forces in Europe, pushes allies to take the lead on defense, and create ‘NATO 3.0’

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth just announced a six-month Pentagon review of American military forces stationed in Europe. This review, which Hegseth dubbed the NATO 3.0 review, is designed to ensure that European nations take the lead on their own conventional defense. According to AP News, this announcement came during a meeting at NATO headquarters in Brussels, where Hegseth stated that the future of U.S. support is tied to how quickly allies can step up.

Hegseth told his NATO counterparts, “This will be a real review. It will be designed to ensure that NATO is moving fast and irreversibly toward Europe leading, stepping up to take primary responsibility for the defense of Europe.” He adds, “It’s a review that some countries will fail and others will pass with flying colors.” Speaking on behalf of the Department of War,  he argued that the alliance had lost its way after the Cold War, drifting into what he described as an era of distraction. 

In his speech, he noted that the goal is to transform the alliance back into a “real military alliance that’s focused on hard power and real deterrence, a NATO 3.0 modeled on the NATO 1.0 that won the Cold War.” According to the transcript, he believes that Europe was never intended to be a dependency of the United States, but rather a military power allied with a strong America.

In his speech, Hegseth referred to NATO as a paper tiger again

The Associated Press noted that Hegseth didn’t hold back when addressing what he perceives as a lack of cooperation regarding base access. He criticized European allies for failing to provide U.S. forces with the necessary access to launch operations in the Middle East, calling the situation “shameful.” A leaked Pentagon letter stated that NATO allies would be punished for not supporting the war, with Spain being first, for denying access to a base.

He stated, “These allies, they put America’s sons and daughters, our sons and daughters, at risk by denying them the predictable access, basing and overflight that never should have been in question at all.” The upcoming review will specifically assess whether the U.S. can secure full access and overflight rights whenever they are needed.

The administration’s frustration reportedly also stems from perceived differences in priorities. Hegseth lamented a past focus on social policies rather than military readiness, stating, “Instead of tanks and fighters and air defenses, the focus has been on gender equity and climate change and defense austerity. Europe’s borders flew wide open, welfare states expanded, defense budgets cratered, along with Europe’s belief in itself and its civilization.” 

Per AP news, many European leaders point to recent increases in defense spending as evidence of their commitment. However, the U.S. continues to press for even more robust contributions, with President Donald Trump pushing for a standard of 5% of GDP to be spent on defense.

Despite the rhetoric, according to the outlet, there are some areas where the U.S. commitment remains firm. The U.S. intends to keep its nuclear weapons in Europe, as they remain a vital part of the alliance’s deterrence architecture. The Nuclear Planning Group even issued a rare statement recently, reinforcing that these forces remain the “supreme guarantee of Allied security.”

It is also worth noting that the U.S. is balancing these European commitments with a need to address potential conflicts in the Indo-Pacific region. AP news pointed out that the administration wants to maintain the capability to handle two simultaneous global conflicts. Thus, they are reevaluating how many military assets, such as aircraft carriers and fighter jets, they can commit to the European theater. 

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has attempted to downplay the impact of these potential cutbacks, describing the current NATO Force Model as a planning tool rather than a final indicator of how the alliance would react in an actual war. Rutte noted, “If war breaks out, we will all max out what we need to do to make sure we can fight the war.” However, it should be noted that in the past, he stated that NATO was reliant on the US for core capabilities.

Hegseth noted that this period of distraction, or NATO 2.0 was also an era of “deindustrialization and demilitarization. It was an era of free riding and those were lost years that we’re not going back to.” Additionally, according to EuroNews, before the meeting, Hegseth mentioned that the goal is to build an “arsenal of freedom that first and foremost protects America and American interests but also backstops the strength of NATO and our allies.”