His message that the United States no longer intends to serve as the primary guarantor of European security is nothing new, but it still leaves Europe wondering where the Trump administration's aggressive new stance toward NATO is coming from.
What is dormant NATO?
What problems is the dormant NATO supposed to solve?
How should Europe prepare for changes in NATO?
Does a dormant NATO mean the US will withdraw from Europe?
One answer can be found in an unlikely place: a 2023 white paper by a British academic and conservative historian Sumantra Maitra. In a document published by the pro-Trump think tank Center for Renewing America, Maitra outlined a theory he called a “dormant NATO” — a radically reshaped alliance in which America plays a much smaller role relative to its European allies. In contrast to NATO's current, more assertive posture, Maitra argued that the new NATO would be “dormant” – it would continue to exist in theory, but in practice it would remain in hibernation until a serious threat to Western security emerged.
Maitra's article — which later turned into a widely commented essay in Foreign Affairs — was reportedly distributed to Trump's closest foreign policy advisers, and its key policy recommendations were reflected in the Trump administration's national security strategy and national defense strategy.
We talked to Maitra about the rationale for Trump's new policy and what Europeans should expect as the United States moves toward a more dormant NATO.
What is dormant NATO?
Dormant NATO is a theoretical doctrine regarding the concept of weight transfer. It tries to find a compromise between the complete withdrawal of the US from Europe and the continuation of the current US strategy of defense and forward positioning and total domination of the European continent.
Why is this change of position necessary? What problems is it supposed to solve?
The foreign policy of any country depends on structural factors, and the structural reality of the world we currently live in is this: on the one hand, we have the rise of China as a rival in Asia, which is in a completely different league compared to almost every other great power the United States has dealt with throughout its history. The second issue is the 20-year-old global war on terrorism that has decimated the US treasury. The United States is hugely in debt and the people are dissatisfied with the endless wars.
So I believe the best way to make progress would be to radically change the grand strategy for a balanced foreign position. This means that Europe is extremely important to us, but fundamentally we will be the power of the Western Hemisphere. Of course, we will go to Europe if there is a hegemonic threat, but if there is no such threat and Europe is stable, rich, powerful and our ally, it can take on a much greater burden when it comes to the security of the continent.
Some people accuse you that a dormant NATO will inevitably become a dead NATO because it will neutralize the obligation under Article 5. How do you respond to this accusation? In what scenario would a dormant NATO reactivate and wake up?
For almost all of its first phase [między 1949 a 1991 r.] NATO was essentially a dormant NATO. It was a defensive alliance that existed only in case of an emergency. If you read Dormant NATO, you will see that at no point does it suggest a complete withdrawal, nor does it suggest that we should not be part of the common defense of Europe. Article 5 of NATO says only one thing: if one of the countries is attacked, it has the right to call on the other countries, and they will sit down for talks. Depending on the type of threat, they will decide how they will participate in future activities. The “dormant NATO” does not change this. If we are called upon to defend Europe, and if we anticipate a hegemonic threat, the United States Congress still has the right to decide that we will go there and defend.
Let's move a bit into the future. What actions in this direction should Europe expect from the United States and how best to prepare for them?
