This might be the US’ final warning before it takes drastic action to punish those who continue to reject Trump’s demands.
Under Secretary of War for Policy Elbridge Colby gave an important speech at mid-April’s Ukraine Defense Contact Group in which he urged the Europeans to step up their transition to something that he described earlier this year as “NATO 3.0”.
As was explained here, “The idea is that NATO should return to focusing on defending itself instead of overextending itself in the Indo-Pacific, West Asia, Eastern Europe, and elsewhere”, and the preceding hyperlinked analysis explains how it aligns with Trump 2.0’s policies.
Circling back to Colby’s speech, he demanded that “Europe must accelerate its assumption of primary responsibility for the conventional defense of the continent”, including arming Ukraine through the “Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List” (PURL) program in which the US plays the most significant role.
To that end, “The need to quickly rebuild European munitions stocks is paramount, as is the need to remove protectionist trade barriers that stifle the continent’s industrial potential.”
He added that “Developing a robust, capable, and integrated European defense industrial base cannot simply be an aspiration, but an absolute pre-requisite for credible deterrence and defense.”
Knowing how obsessed they are with Ukraine, Colby then threw in that “This will be critical to achieving an end to the war in Ukraine, on terms that support an enduring peace.”
He then called for more “deeds and a fundamental change in attitude” from them to “accelerate this transition to a ‘NATO 3.0’”.
Colby concluded that “If Europe rises to this moment – truly embracing primary responsibility for the defense of the continent in line with our vision of a rebalanced ‘NATO 3.0’ – we will all be stronger and more credible in defending our people and our national interests.”
He also ominously warned them midway through his speech that “I underline the criticality of [NATO stepping up to help secure the Strait of Hormuz per Trump’s expectation] for our relationship going forward.”
As was assessed here last month and was just implicitly reaffirmed by Colby, the US might speed up its planned military reprioritization away from Europe to the Americas and the Indo-Pacific if they reject Trump’s request by ending its significant PURL contributions before NATO can replace them. That would facilitate a full Russian victory in Ukraine, or at least spook the Europeans into fearing that this is inevitable if they don’t step up right after he cuts off arms again, thus getting them to do what he wants.
If some members of the bloc refuse to contribute while others do, then Trump might impose his reportedly considered pay-to-play model that was described here, which would remove “dissidents” from decision-making processes and withdraw the US’ Article 5 support from them. These punishments could also be imposed for refusing to spend 5% of GDP on defense. It’s very likely that Colby conveyed these punitive plans to his counterparts on the sidelines of the event even if he only hinted at them.
His urging of them to step up their transition to “NATO 3.0”, which is his brainchild, can therefore be considered the US’ final warning before it takes drastic action to punish those who continue to reject Trump’s demands.
Imposing the pay-to-play model is one form that this could take while cutting off arms to Ukraine once again could be another.
Both could also happen together.
It’s unclear what NATO as a whole will do, let alone its individual members, but it’s obvious that Trump is losing patience with them.