NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte speaks at the alliance’s headquarters in Brussels in this undated photo. (NATO)
A NATO force model that could see fewer U.S. troops brought to Europe during a crisis is under review, the alliance’s top official confirmed Wednesday.
Speaking at a news conference in Brussels, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte was asked about a reported upcoming U.S. announcement outlining plans for a smaller contribution to the alliance’s force-generating system.
“This was to be expected,” Rutte said. “I think it is only right that it happens. What exactly will be the announcement? You have to wait until later. I’m not allowed to disclose that.”
Rutte’s comments come after Reuters reported Wednesday that the U.S. is prepared to reduce what it will make available to NATO in a crisis.
The news agency, citing unidentified officials, didn’t specify the types or numbers of capabilities and troops involved in the change.
However, Reuters said an announcement was expected during a Friday NATO policy meeting in Brussels. Alex Velez-Green, a top adviser to Defense Department policy chief Elbridge Colby, was likely to attend, the report added.
While Rutte didn’t divulge details, he suggested that a reduction was anticipated.
“This is a debate which started again a year ago,” he said. “This is why Europe is spending so much more to basically end the overreliance on one ally when it comes to defense of the totality of NATO.”
The NATO force model is a system used to generate and assign forces from respective members state to implement various defense plans.
One part of the model involves resources from the continental United States that would be made available to allies in a major crisis.
The potential for the U.S. to play a smaller role in that construct, the details of which are a closely guarded secret, comes as the Pentagon pressures allies to take on a larger role in the conventional defense of Europe.
Adjusting NATO defense plans to ensure a larger European role is something key figures in the Pentagon have long eyed.
Velez-Green, a former defense analyst with the Heritage Foundation, said two years ago that NATO would need to go back to the drawing board if the alliance’s contingency plans were “predicated on the United States still providing the preponderance of forces.”
“You may end up with regional defense plans that are still quite similar in form, but the guts, if you will, are going to need to be updated to make sure they’re implementable,” he told Stars and Stripes at the time.
The idea behind a smaller U.S. role in NATO defense planning is that American forces could be needed elsewhere in a simultaneous conflict with China.
U.S. European Command’s Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, who also serves as NATO’s supreme allied commander, has voiced similar concerns.
At a meeting of military and industrial leaders in Wiesbaden, Germany, last summer, he said allies must prepare for the possibility that Russia and China could launch wars in Europe and the Pacific, respectively, at the same time. The year 2027 could be a flashpoint, he said.
“We’re going to need every bit of kit and equipment and munitions that we can in order to beat that,” Grynkewich said.
