NATO divisions raise questions over its Future

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has recently witnessed clear divisions among its members, especially with rising tensions linked to the American role in some crises and wars. Several countries also appeared cautious about direct involvement in any war against Iran, trying to avoid military entanglement and its political and economic consequences.

In this regard, international relations researcher Abdul Masih Al-Shami said that the direct reason why NATO countries, especially European ones, are unwilling to join a possible war with Iran is not only the nature of the war itself, but also the growing disagreements between the United States and alliance members, particularly the European Union.

Al-Shami noted that these disagreements date back to Trump’s first presidency and worsened during the election campaign and because of differing positions on the war in Ukraine.

Deep Disputes Across the Atlantic

Al-Shami explained that Europe remains politically linked to traditional institutions and elites inside the United States, sometimes referred to as the “deep state,” whose orientations differ from the Trump administration, which represents a newer political trend outside that traditional framework.

He added that these elites, tied to the military-industrial complex and major lobbying groups, also have strong influence in Europe, deepening the divide between both sides.

He said the issue is not only about a war with Iran, but about broader and deeper disputes. Trump’s calls were not truly aimed at involving Europe in war, but rather pressuring it, knowing Europe would not easily respond.

He stressed that if Europe were to participate, it would demand conditions such as sharing war costs or increasing NATO spending, which pushed Europe to distance itself from such a conflict.

Is the United States Approaching Withdrawal?

Regarding the possibility of U.S. withdrawal from NATO, Al-Shami believes the alliance is nearing its end. He described NATO as a very costly military bloc whose members face increasing disagreements, amid unclear goals and declining consensus on working mechanisms.

He also pointed to funding problems, in addition to changing reasons for which the alliance was originally created.

NATO’s Future in a Changing World

Al-Shami believes that under Trump’s direction, the United States today appears closer to Russia than to Europe, weakening the main justification for NATO’s existence, which was originally founded to confront Russia.

He argued that the reasons for keeping the alliance, amid these divisions and disagreements, and with new U.S. strategies focusing more on technology and economics rather than militarization, seem weak.

He concluded by saying that the world is moving toward a form of competition that does not rely on major wars, making a military alliance the size of NATO more of an economic burden than an effective tool. This could eventually lead to its fragmentation or the withdrawal of some members, not only the United States.

a.k

ANHA