A legal expert said in an article in the American National Journal that the United States can no longer act as a dominant military power in the world, noting that those days are over now.
Ramon Marx - a retired international lawyer in New York - mentioned at the outset of his article that since he took office, US President Donald Trump has begun to raise his mind by complaining that European countries under NATO are not fulfilling the obligations set out in the 2014 agreement, which It requires allocating at least 2% of GDP in its defense budgets by 2021.
Germany's contribution was the worst - according to the author - as only 1.3% of its GDP was spent on defense, and it did not undertake to fulfill the 2% allocation requirement contained in the said agreement until 2031.
The Trump administration has been criticized for putting excessive pressure on its European allies to push them to take more responsibility to defend themselves.
According to Marx, Trump's sharp tone of speech was seen as a sign that the United States' interest in NATO was declining, causing some to express their concerns that Washington might abandon the alliance, or significantly diminish its long-term strategic commitment to it.
NATO's traditional backers criticize the Trump administration's sharp tone toward NATO. Many of them believe that America's military contribution to the alliance should remain at its current levels to help stabilize it.
And German Chancellor Angela Merkel has previously hinted that Washington's stance may push Europe to be drawn into adopting a new style of neutrality. "I can only say that we Europeans must take our destinies into our own hands," she declared after a meeting of NATO and the Group of Seven major industrialized nations in late May.
Merkel said that, of course, can only be done in a spirit of friendship with the United States, Britain and with other countries, including even Russia.
Some went further, claiming that the current US administration intends to withdraw from NATO, in recognition of Russia for its alleged assistance to Trump in winning the 2016 elections that brought him to the presidency in the United States.
In his article in the National Interest Magazine, Ramon Marx sees that although the pressure exerted by Washington on its European allies may in the past have been more severe than it is now, the fact of the matter is that the Trump administration has also taken strong positions against Russia and support for NATO far outweighed any kind phrases Trump uttered by Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The writer pointed out that the United States abolished the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Weapons Treaty with Russia, and announced its intention to withdraw from the Open Skies or Open Skies agreement that was adopted in 1992 by 27 countries in the Finnish capital, Helsinki.
Not only that, but the United States has threatened not to extend the term of the new treaty to reduce strategic offensive weapons (the New Start) - which was concluded with Russia on April 8, 2010 in the Czech capital Prague - unless China joins it and Moscow agrees to strengthen verification mechanisms From their application.
The US administration continues to refuse to reduce its missile defense systems, which Russia has long vigorously opposed as destabilizing weapons.
In the first month of his presidency, Trump imposed sanctions on Russia for annexing the Crimea. He also punished Putin's wealthy friends, imposed sanctions on Moscow for its interference in the US elections, and ordered the closure of Russian diplomatic headquarters in the cities of New York, San Francisco, Seattle and Washington DC.
Trump himself expelled 60 Russian diplomats from the United States over the issue of poisoning ex-Russian spy Sergey Skripal and his daughter in Britain on March 4, 2018.
Besides its sanctions on Russia and its retreat from nuclear disarmament, the United States continued to show strong support for NATO and Europe, as in 2018 it signed an agreement with Poland worth $ 4.75 billion to deploy more Patriot missile defense systems against Russia.
That same year, the United States deployed the Stryker Brigade as part of the "Enhancing NATO's Advanced Presence" program in eastern Europe.
The Trump administration has just announced plans to withdraw its forces from Germany and reposition them in Poland near Russia.
In his article, Ramon Marx moves to talk about America's policy towards Ukraine. In this regard, he says, Washington has been ahead of NATO and its European allies in its support for Ukraine, which is under pressure from Russia.
He adds that American support represents 90% of all military aid to Ukraine.
A new imperative
However, a new imperative to rebalancing in Europe is emerging. The author believes that conventional precision-guided missiles, electronic weapons, drones, missiles and hypersonic aircraft have all revolutionized the arts of war.
However, the forward bases of US operations stationed with NATO appear to be more vulnerable to preemptive strikes from such sophisticated weapons than ever before.
In a few minutes or seconds, Russia can launch a barrage of missiles and launch drone attacks against all US bases and headquarters in Europe, in conjunction with cyber or even space strikes.
The threats posed by these new military capabilities will compel the United States and its allies to sit together to assess how to rearrange its troop structure in Western Europe so that it can withstand any attacks and deter any new challenges.
The author of the article suggests to the United States the need to switch to have a smaller base in Europe, which will ensure that it will withstand sudden pre-emptive strikes.
By repatriating some of its military resources abroad and adding it to its strategic reserve, it will be easy for the United States to respond to a surprise missile or drone or cyber attack on European NATO countries.
The author concludes by saying that maintaining large military bases in Europe may be a luxury above the energy of the United States and its allies.