Former American President Donald Trump has once again shaken international relations by calling into question the principle of solidarity that governs NATO. On February 11, during a campaign rally in South Carolina, the man who is seeking a second term as "commander in chief" once again criticized the member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for not financing sufficiently the institution and suggested that it might not protect an ally in the event of a Russian attack.

These shocking remarks aroused concern in Europe. Since its creation in 1949, in the aftermath of the Second World War, NATO is not in its first crisis and its relationship with the United States has often been tumultuous. As Jenny Raflik, professor of contemporary history at the University of Nantes, points out, it was not on the other side of the Atlantic that the idea of ​​this alliance was born. “It was first of all a desire of the French and the British because they were afraid that the United States would turn away from Europe. The Americans had brought their troops home, while the Russians had not demobilized. There was a real fear of seeing Russia attack,” describes this specialist in international relations. “At the time, the Americans did not want to set foot in Europe again for a long time. In the current context, it is interesting to see that they were already asking the Europeans to really commit to their own defense.”

Finally, despite these reluctances, the explosion in September 1949 of the first Soviet atomic bomb and the outbreak of the Korean War accelerated the establishment of NATO's integrated military structure. In the context of the beginnings of the Cold War, NATO's role then consisted – in the words of its first Secretary General, Lord Ismay – "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans under guardianship.

“The backbone of NATO”

The United States is gradually occupying the leading role in this alliance. “They become the backbone of NATO because Europe is lacking, particularly in terms of financial, material and industrial resources. Post-war Europe is first mobilized in its reconstruction and modernization. Many European countries are also very quickly caught up in the process of decolonization, such as France, the Netherlands or Great Britain,” explains Jenny Raflik.

Very quickly, the Alliance experienced moments of tension. In the midst of the Indochina War, France asked its allies to finance their military effort through NATO. “The Americans give weapons, but they want to have a right to control their use. The French are therefore offended by American interference in their military affairs,” says the historian. “These are misunderstandings that we constantly find between Americans and Europeans. The Americans pay and expect to have a determining influence in the development of military strategy.”

After the Cold War

With the fall of the Soviet Union, NATO lost its natural adversary, but its existence was not called into question. "The idea of ​​seeing the Alliance disappear did not last very long. Keeping the Americans on the European continent was seen as something reassuring. The Soviet threat had disappeared, but the Russian threat remained strong in the minds of many countries", analyzes Jenny Raflik. "There is still a gradual disengagement of the Americans on European soil with the closure of military bases. Europe is no longer really at the heart of the concerns of American geopolitics, as it could have been at the start of the War cold."

Paradoxically, it was after the end of the confrontation between the Western and Eastern blocs that NATO undertook its first military operations. In 1999, it bombed Yugoslavia during the Kosovo War. “We had to wait until the end of the Cold War for NATO to act. This was a first test to judge its military potential and the ability of the Allies to act together,” underlines Jenny Raflik.

Two years later, the world entered a new era with the September 11 attacks on American soil. For the first time in its history, NATO invokes Article 5 of the Washington Treaty providing that all members of the Alliance must come to the aid of a member under attack. NATO then carried out its first anti-terrorist operations, notably in the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean, but the large-scale military operations of the United States nevertheless took place outside the framework of the organization, as Jenny Raflik recalls: " "The Alliance is ultimately only used on the margins. The Americans prefer the mechanism of an international coalition under their leadership and under a UN mandate to have a little more room for maneuver."

An “obsolete” organization

Since the beginning of the 2010s, the organization has faced renewed tensions. The threats are different and the priorities are not necessarily the same among the Allies, according to the historian: "NATO was divided between those who were obsessed with the Russians and those who were obsessed with terrorism. Each defended its interests and lived in its own geopolitical reality. This weakened the Alliance.

In 2017, even before his election to the presidency of the United States, Donald Trump attacked the organization, believing that it was obsolete "because it did not deal with terrorism", while reproaching already to its Member States for not paying their share of common defense. Two years later, French President Emmanuel Macron drove the point home by judging that NATO was in a state of “brain death”.

But since the start of Russia's large-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the Alliance appears resurrected. The original enemy, returning, offered him renewed interest. “There is nothing stronger for an alliance than looking in the same direction and towards the same threat. There is a return to the essence of NATO with this gaze once again focused towards the East” , summarizes Jenny Raflik. But this strengthening has been undermined by the recent resounding declarations of Donald Trump. As in 2017, the Republican candidate caused trouble by asserting that few countries were paying what they should. “The danger for the Alliance is that it exposes its weaknesses in broad daylight. It damages its credibility. It is a godsend for the Russians who see the West tearing each other apart.”

The historian, however, minimizes the significance of these words. She recalls that seven years ago, Donald Trump walked back his comments. Once elected, he affirmed that NATO was no longer obsolete and that it was a “bulwark for international peace”. For Jenny Raflik, even if the businessman returns to the Oval Office, the existence of the Alliance will not be called into question: "There are safeguards, particularly in the American Congress. The United States is a democracy. Donald Trump will not do what he wants. Moreover, NATO inaugurated a brand new headquarters a few years ago which cost millions of dollars. This is not to shut down the door tomorrow. It could evolve, but it will not disappear."

The France 24 summary of the week

invites you to look back at the news that marked the week

I subscribe

Take international news everywhere with you! Download the France 24 application