Publication
Burden Sharing for What? NATO Implications of Three US Visions
In this article, Linde Desmaele examines the dilemmas created by US burden sharing policies from the perspective of Washington's European protégés. She unpacks the diverging motivations behind US calls for greater European defence spending and better NATO burden sharing.
- Author
- Linde Desmaele
- Date
- 18 December 2024
- Links
- Read the full article here
Desmaele identifies three competing U.S. visions for NATO burden-sharing, each striving for political influence. The first emphasises enhanced burden-sharing to bolster NATO’s capabilities amid a growingly contested security environment. The second envisions a more conditional NATO, treating burden-sharing as a cost for U.S. security protection. The third advocates increased burden-sharing to support a partial U.S. withdrawal from Europe, allowing the United States to focus more resources on other strategic priorities.
The article argues that European allies, like the United States, face their own set of burden-sharing dilemmas. Importantly, Europe is not a single unified actor, and the benefits, costs, and risks of various burden-sharing strategies may differ across nations. As a result, allies may have differing views on whether to maintain or deepen their reliance on the U.S. for security.