Washington plans to slash fighter jets and warships to NATO in Europe, US media report

Washington to Trim NATO Military Assets in Europe, US Media Reports

Washington plans to slash fighter jets - Amid growing tensions in US-NATO relations, the United States is set to reduce its military contributions to the alliance’s European defense framework, according to recent reports by US media outlets. The plan, which includes cutting access to key deep strike capabilities, is part of a broader strategy to reallocate resources to other strategic regions. This shift has sparked concern among European allies, who fear it could weaken NATO’s collective deterrence posture. The details of the proposed reductions were previously unclear, but sources have now revealed specifics about the Pentagon’s approach to scaling back its commitments.

The Trump administration has long signaled its intent to reduce the US military’s footprint in Europe, with allies receiving early warnings about the changes. While the decision to cut assets was announced last year, the exact nature of the cuts—particularly their impact on wartime readiness—remained unaddressed until now. According to Euronews, the Pentagon plans to eliminate all deep strike capabilities, which are critical for targeting enemy forces deep within enemy territory. This includes the removal of long-range bombers like the B-2 and B-52, as well as naval assets such as missile-launching submarines and aircraft carriers.

Under the new strategy, the number of fighter jets provided to NATO allies will also be reduced. The New York Times reports that the US will cut the available count of F-16 and F-15E fighter jets from approximately 150 to 100, a move that could significantly affect airpower availability in Europe. Additionally, maritime reconnaissance aircraft, which play a vital role in monitoring coastal and oceanic activity, are set to decline from 26 to 15. The plan also involves withdrawing all eight aerial refueling tanker jets that have historically supported NATO operations in the region. These reductions are expected to reshape the balance of power within the alliance, particularly as the US shifts its focus to Asia.

The NATO Force Model and Its Adjustments

The changes are being implemented through NATO’s Force Model system, a framework that outlines the alliance’s military capabilities based on threat assessments and deterrence requirements. This model allows member states to evaluate their own contributions and understand the resources available to collective operations. However, the latest announcement marks a departure from previous commitments, as the US European Command has confirmed its intention to "right-size" its contributions. This means scaling back the number of forces and assets deployed to Europe, which has raised questions about the reliability of US support for NATO’s defense initiatives.

Senior NATO officials have been preparing for this transition for months, but they have publicly downplayed the implications. They argue that European allies have significantly increased their own defense spending and are now capable of compensating for the gaps left by the US. Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, for instance, stated last month that the US must "pivot toward, for example, Asia," emphasizing that Europe is ready to take on more responsibility. Despite these assurances, the reductions could create a short-term imbalance in NATO’s military readiness, particularly in scenarios requiring rapid response or sustained operations.

The latest move comes at a critical juncture for US-NATO relations. President Donald Trump has continued to criticize European allies for not fully supporting the US in its military actions against Iran. He has accused countries such as Spain, Italy, and France of being "cowards" for refusing to allow US planes bound for Iran to use their airspace and bases. Trump’s frustration is evident in his public statements, including a March social media post where he warned that "Without the U.S.A., NATO IS A PAPER TIGER!" He further emphasized that "We will REMEMBER!" the refusal of these allies to assist in the conflict.

"We know that adjustments will take place, the US has to pivot toward, for example, Asia," Rutte told journalists last month.

This sentiment reflects a broader tension between the US and its European partners, who have been vocal about the need to reduce financial and military burdens. The Trump administration’s decision to cut assets is seen as a reaction to Europe’s reluctance to fund the US’s global military engagements, particularly in the Middle East. However, the move could also be a strategic shift to prioritize emerging threats in Asia, such as those posed by China and Russia.

While the reductions are part of a long-term strategy, they have been met with mixed reactions. Some analysts argue that the cuts are necessary to align US military priorities with its growing interests in the Indo-Pacific region. Others warn that the changes could undermine NATO’s ability to respond to crises in Europe, especially if the US reduces its presence during critical moments. The situation is further complicated by the timing of the announcement, which coincides with the ongoing war in Iran and the potential for hostilities to escalate.

European allies are now working to mitigate the impact of the US withdrawal. A coalition of NATO members and other countries, including South Korea and Australia, has been developing a strategy to reopen the Strait of Hormuz once the conflict in Iran subsides. To prepare for this, several nations have deployed frigates and personnel to the region for pre-positioning. This effort underscores the determination of European and Asian partners to maintain their own defense capabilities and reduce reliance on the US. However, the timeline for this strategy remains uncertain, as the war in Iran continues to unfold.

The implications of the cuts extend beyond immediate operational readiness. They signal a potential realignment of NATO’s strategic priorities, with the US focusing more on Asia and less on Europe. This shift may also affect the alliance’s ability to project power in other regions, such as the Mediterranean or the Arctic. As the US and its allies continue to negotiate the terms of this new military posture, the question remains: will Europe be able to fill the void left by the US, or will the cuts weaken NATO’s collective defense framework?

With the Pentagon’s plan to reduce assets now in motion, NATO faces a critical test of its resilience. The Force Model, once a symbol of shared commitment, may need to be reimagined in light of these changes. While the US insists its contributions remain essential, the cuts suggest a growing emphasis on strategic realignment. As the war in Iran continues and the Atlantic alliance adjusts to new realities, the balance of power within NATO will be a key factor in determining its future effectiveness.