The current crisis surrounding NATO is not the result of a single political decision or a sudden shock. Instead, it reflects a long-term structural transformation shaped by shifting global realities, internal divisions, and the gradual weakening of the conditions that once justified its existence. When Donald Trump openly threatened to withdraw the United States from the alliance, the relatively calm reaction across Western capitals suggested something deeper than surprise. It indicated a growing awareness that NATO’s foundational assumptions are increasingly under pressure.

At its creation in 1949, NATO was built on a clear and urgent strategic need. The presence of the Soviet Union provided a shared external threat that united its members. Western Europe depended on American military protection, while the United States required a strong position in Europe to contain Soviet influence. This mutual dependence created a stable alliance grounded in common security interests. The clarity of purpose helped maintain unity despite differences among member states.

However, the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 fundamentally changed the global environment. The main threat that had justified NATO’s existence disappeared, yet the alliance remained. Instead of dissolving or reducing its role, NATO expanded both geographically and functionally. It extended its membership into Eastern Europe and increasingly engaged in operations beyond its original defensive mandate. These steps were intended to preserve relevance, but they also introduced new challenges.

One of the central issues facing NATO today is the need to redefine its purpose in the absence of a single unifying threat. As the alliance sought to adapt, it often justified its........

© Blitz