Former US National Security Advisor John Bolton told Tom Swarbrick on LBC that it is “highly probable that Trump will try and withdraw the United States from NATO”.
Speaking on Thursday, 13 February 2025, Bolton suggested that Trump is setting preconditions—such as demanding NATO allies increase defence spending from 2% to 5% of GDP—that could ultimately justify a US withdrawal.
Bolton explained, “First he said back in his initial term, well, all these Europeans are not spending 2% of GDP on defence… Now he’s saying you need to spend 5% of GDP on defence. I personally think that’s what the US should spend. I think in a challenging world, we’re not spending enough, and we’re at about three now. But I suspect there’s almost no country in Europe, maybe the Baltics and Poland and a few others that will go to 5%. So in a year when it doesn’t happen, Trump will be able to say, NATO is just as worthless as I always said it was. I’m getting out.”
When asked about the impact on European security, Bolton added, “I think you’ll miss us when we’re gone. That’s what I think. Look, when the US withdraws and calls its alliances into question and weakens its allies, you know, the status quo doesn’t remain. Either chaos ensues or some adversary steps in to pick up the gap, which is why this is so dangerous. And Ukraine could well turn out to be the precipitating circumstance that leads to, if not American withdrawal, substantial decline in U.S. participation in NATO.”
Listen to the full show on Global Player.
Yeah Trump cannot withdraw from NATO as he would need congress to approve and there is no way he would get that plus if he did try, this will be such a clear sign that America can no longer be trusted and America as a super power will be finished as no one will trust them ever again as they will have fatally compromised NATO and effectively be admitting defeat in this supposed Sino-American Cold War
Trump can withdraw from NATO despite the law congress passed. Ultimately all he needs to do is make a statement to the effect and order US forces to withdraw from the structure. Ultimately it’s up to the Supreme Court to decide if congress can block an official move but it’s likely he would win that.
Trump now wants a deal with China and Russia to cut military spending in half. Americans is reverting to its pre 1941 position of isolation and minimum military spending.
Ultimately this is what America has wanted for a while, given the Donald’s new propensity to threaten the territorial integrity of his neighbours I would be much more comfortable in a world where the US cuts its defence budget by 50%.
We should act like this is all true and start an emergency program for expansion of both naval and airforces. The US is cutting back on F35B purchases and it may even cancel any new buys so we can quickly buy some F35. Wharton is almost finished the Qatari order so we can easily get another 24 Typhoons by 2027 and we can get the Tranche 1 back and start the same upgrade program the Spanish are doing on their tranche 1 airframes.
We can get the RAF up to 250 airframes (note I’m only talking about aircraft and not squadrons) in about three years with about £5-£7billion of new money. We obviously need more to get pilots and squadrons running however we can look at an air national guard style model for retiring pilots and operate two reserve squadrons of typhoons along side 6 full time typhoon squadrons.
Even with no more pilots or squadrons it would be useful to have a big increase in airframes for attrition purposes.
For the navy we are pretty screwed as we can’t realistically get any more frigates until the mid 2030’s but with the USA pulling our of Asia it’s unlikely we will be getting dragged into a naval war. Our current navy can easily contain the Russians.
I’m not convinced the US will withdraw due to many reasons financial / business being the prime reasons. Any drawdown will take many years and long after Trump’s tenure and the likelihood of a reversal in US policy can’t be ruled out. The US air component could be reduced however, as we witnessed with RAF Fairford can quickly be bolstered when required. For the UK, RAF Lakenheath and Mildenhall would probably continue at a reduced pace but not be abandoned because the UK is an ideal base for European operations. The RAF needs to be strengthened with additional F35 and Typhoon to fill any possible reduction in US aircraft from the UK. The 80 or so US aircraft though not officially part of UK air cover would in truth, be deployed against any direct threat to the UK. All European nations should be increasing defence spending and Trump’s threats should be used as a fulcrum to achieve just that.
I don’t think our current navy can contain Russia. The combined European NATO can. Once UK, Italy, France, Turkey, Spain, Germany, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands etc added together we have a powerful force easily able to surpass Russia.
RAF agree. Urgent order for additional F35Bs, a new tranche 4 typhoon (36-48 aircraft) pushing Tempest/ GCAP into production phase, a few more Wedgetails, Poseidon MPA and A400Ms and UK will be looking decent again.
Army is our weakest link. We need a new IFV. Latvia has just ordered Ascod with 40mm turret. UK needs something similar. More Archer SPGs x76, additional MLRS with crucially adequate stores of munitions.
C2 to C3 as many as possible. So approx 200+ tanks and finally put back 10,000 troops onto the army’s order of battle.
We have to be able to deploy a reinforced heavy division with enablers and some lighter mobile brigades. If the UK can contribute around 50,000 troops to a high intensity conflict, alongside our EU allies that’ll be enough.
There is no realistic scenario where the UK is fighting Russia without multiple other European nations involved, at which point Russia wouldn’t stand a chance in a conventional war.
When survival is at stake, every European nation would be able to field a massive army. If the UK was under threat we could probably mobilise a million plus fairly quickly. Combine that with other nations and Russia would be massively out numbered. Especially as most of their current fighting force are effectively conscripts as their professional army was mainly already wiped out.
where would 1 million come from? would they be armed with broomsticks?
Jim, have you forgotten about re-captalising the army? They are on their knees as regards the warfighting division.
Jim, never under estimate Donald. He has Presidential immunity, he is above the law. He can disregard, ignore any court, any law. He will over ride Congress. With constant approval from social media and Murdoch Media Empire, old Donnie is unstoppable. Probably he is now the most power man in Recorded history.
Knight, Trump could withdraw the US from the integrated military command structure, without formally leaving the Alliance, as de Gaulle did. That may not need the agreement of Congress.
GM,
Exactly the same thought has occurred to others. Foregone conclusion that US participation w/in NATO will diminish during the administration of this POTUS, even under ideal conditions. Alea jacta est If ENATO objects strenuously to US negotiated terms and conditions of RU-UKR ceasefire, demurs from increasing NATO goal of defence expenditure to ~5% of GDP, or refuses any other act of fealty to the current POTUS, such conduct could be viewed as a sufficient pretext to trigger US withdrawal from NATO integrated command structure. ENATO would be extremely well advised to accordingly plan for an independent course guided by self-interest. Unfortunately, ENATO would be embarking on this course from a position of previous underinvestment in defence. Significantly less than an ideal scenario, but plausibly manageable. 🤔😳🤞🤞
John Bolton?..wrong again. President Trump living in Bolton’s head, rent free.
Trump is certainly working his hardest to destroy NATO from the inside
At this point i think it might be a positive. Europe whilst in not a great state, combined is more than capable of taking on Russia if needed. The US using nato for its own polictical/trade aims has been a consistent thing for the last few decades. Better for Europe to stand on its own feet. The exit from ukraine was one of a string of cases where they didn’t trust their allies and messed them over because of it.
I suspect the US would want to rejoin rapidly, as they like using nato as a way to justify things, and show its not them just acting on their own. At which point they might realise they need to be a more reliable partner.
Exit for afgan not ukraine.
Europe take Russia? comical. The German army doesn’t even train with real weapons.
Europe would destroy Russian military infrastructure within a couple of weeks, obviously if nukes are off the table. If nukes are on the table then we destroy each other in a couple of hours.
Ukraine alone is gradually dismantling Russias combat power! Add in all of Europe and everything they can bring to the table and Russia is toast. The only issue is nuclear where Russia over powers Europe. Even then France and the UK pose enough threat to hopefully act as a sufficient deterrant. My concern is relying on the US for our trident missiles, that is a massive lead weight round our ankles that prevents us telling the US to go do one.
Partially. I’m sure we could build our own if their was the desire, as their have plenty of decent missile companies based in Europe and the bomb part is known. Combine that with trident won’t be taken away so gives time to build them.
Steve, we build the ‘bomb part’ in the UK.
Reverse engineer the rest with the French.
If the US exited NATO I can’t imagine anyone letting them back in.
John Bolton has zero credibility.
Trump called him an idiot and fired him. Ever since he’s gone around fear slandering to anyone who will listen.
Trump has zero credibility. If Trump calls someone an idiot and fires them that usually means they are the sensible ones, not Trump.
You are completely correct in your opinion about Trump. He is mostly a nitwit and an incompetent and John Bolton would “run rings” around him.
Although I don’t always agree with John Bolton, he is an extremely intelligent and articulate man who has held various high-level positions in several different US presidential administrations over a period of over 40 years. I have heard him speak in many interviews over the years on many subjects involving the US government and he is a very smart guy. He has great knowledge about the workings of the US government which is the exact opposite of Trump. The only thing that Trump seems to be good at is lying and convincing ignorant, gullible people into believing things that aren’t true.
👍Exactly!
John Bolton has more brains in his pinky than Donald Trump has in his entire body. Donald Trump is a complete incompetent who can’t do much of anything straight. Trump isn’t even a particularly successful real estate developer. That is largely a myth. He is really “A rich man’s son”, and that is not a compliment. Trump is a showman/salesman who is good at convincing naive, ignorant people that he is something that he really isn’t.
NATO only works because all the other members accept that the US is the leader. If the US leaves, and it’s still a very big if, NATO will slowly die because of internal infighting. But the threat of them leaving should still be a serious wake up call. Article 5 doesn’t automatically mean US boots involved. If the US priorities lie elsewhere and it does kick off in Europe, they will “do what they can” but Europe has been warned. It’s no longer a gimme that the US will intervene.
Nevis, the US certainly contributes the most military might to NATO and has bagged many of the command appointements, but is it really ‘the leader’ of NATO? The Sec Gen is always a European. The North Atlantic Council (the decision making body) and the Defence Policy and Planning Committee (DPPC) are not US-led, and the US has no greater votong power than any other nation in Council or DPPC.
If the US left NATO, I think there is every chance that NATO would continue. Collective defence is vital in Europe.
If the US leaves NATO, I can see the EU rapidly cobbling together an EU 27 + treaty.
That would leave our cousins in Canada left exposed. Although the US and Canada have a North American collective defence treaty, it would only leave the UK to join any effect should Canada (such a remote thought) be attacked. Australia could be a nation that would be very nervous should the US become more insular. Of course, Australia, New Zealand and Canada together with the UK, can all rely on each other, but would the US intervene? Remember, while China calls Siberia the Northern Resources Area, it calls Australia “the Southern Resources Area”.
The U.K. dragging its heels on defence doesn’t help the situation either. A lot of Europe are still asleep in terms of their national security needs. And suddenly it may become too late.
Its been three years and we may have just woken up. Some sleep; let’s just hope its not a rude awakening.
Bolton has it in for Trump and has done for some time. His opinions need to be viewed in that context.
Constant fawning over ‘The Special Relationship’ has destroyed our country’s (UK) independence, both militarily and in foreign policy.
The US will always look after its own interests – and why not? Why should Americans foot the bill for European defence?
The Special Relationship is a myth and not one of equals.
We need to get defence spending over 3% immediately, even if that means more taxes.
Wars bankrupt nations – defence spending is an insurance policy that hopefully helps prevent war, even if a leaves a little less in the pocket.
Plenty of money there if you wind back net zero. Defence would be awash.
I was concerned until I saw the name Bolton.🙄
We should ditch the US as soon as possible. It obvious that Trump is looking to partner with Russia. F-35s going to India, where Russia will have access to them. He is only threatening Denmark over Greenland. Even Farage is coming out against Trump on Ukraine.
Bolton is not a balanced commentator…he may be correct but don’t take it as read.
I do think the evidence is all in place that trump will if he can end NATO, but the question is can he…possibly
Jonathan, I don’t see that Trump is determined to end NATO. He is determined that Canada and all of ENATO firstly spend at least 2% and soon therafter spend 5% of GDP on Defence.
If this does not happen Trump might order that the US leave the integrated military command structure, as de Gaulle did. I think he could do that by Executive Order as it would not be leaving the NATO organisation in toto.
The US leaving NATO does not have to mean the end of NATO. It is in the interests of ENATO members to continue to have an effective and proven military alliance.
GM,
Unfortunately, am compelled to agree w/ your SITREP and prediction of probable course of near-term events. ENATO would be extremely well advised to begin planning for this contingency. A credible, independent ENATO+C is feasible, given sufficient time and resources. (ENATO taxpayers may, however, prove to be unhappy campers, if this policy is executed.)
As there are faint glimmers glimmers of hope that Europe is going to stand behind Ukraine and tell Trump NO to his surrender of Ukraine. I am expecting his next move to be either the NATO nations side with him or he is pulling out of NATO.
It is black and white he can’t, no way will he get the 2/3rds but he can refuse to honour article 5 or he could attach Canada or Greenland. Both I suspect would lead to the US being expelled.
Michael, Not sure what you mean by ‘Europe’. ENATO or the EU or all 43 nations in Europe??
Could ‘Europe’ dictate to Trump – ‘Europe’ is unlikely to even be at the Peace talks.
On the flip side, IF Ukraine joins NATO, then are they obliged to have nuclear weapons?
A military partner should be able to operate independently and alliances then formed for mutual benefit. The truth is that from the US point of view we are not partners but customers and, worse still, customers who don’t pay.
The question about why US taxpayers pay for European security while social programs are advanced in Europe instead is a valid one. Were it the other way around the UK taxpayer would not be pleased.
There’s also in my opinion horrible foreign policy issues with being militarily dependent on another country many economic and technological advantages of having sovereign capability.
The current situation is our own fault – successive shortsighted government policy and nobody explaining the need for proper deterrent defence to the public. The only bright spot is that we’ve retained enough to recover from, although recent reports of defense chiefs being called into number 10 to get the bad news about 2.5% are not encouraging.
Only an idiot would say that,look at the American losses in business in the defence industry, if he pulls out of nato that’s his consequences,I would not buy any American equipment, concentrate on European protection and buy from our friends in Europe, America can go to hell !!!trump the man who destroyed America
I don’t understand the thinking. The US spends 3 times what the EU does collectively on defense and has done for decades. It contributes 16% of NATO total defense budget, has more troops in Europe than the UK has in total, provides air-to-air refueling, ballistic missile defence, nuclear umbrella and much more. In fact, one article from RAND has the US bearing 47% of the total NATO burden.
I don’t believe we’ve the manufacturing capability nor the skill set not the political will to replace what the US NATO presence provides us without buying US ordinance. That would make us customers of another sort … but at least we’d be paying customers.
In an interconnected world everywhere is the front line. For US to retreat from Europe is 10x worse than the retreat from Afghanistan. If Trump was serious he would not have even suggested pulling out of Afghanistan. Think of all the rare earth metals he could have got his hands on.
True Europe needs to double its spend; but 5%? You must be joking.
3% right now and 4% by 2030.
I think trump is a lunatic who will ultimately destroy America, and if not stopped he could destroy the world. NATO should boot trump and the US out of NATO and bring Ukraine in. Trump is best buds with Putin, who is also a lunatic. Russia has a habit of invading other countries, and this is what Trump wants to emulate. Trump wants to be a dictator and do away with free speech, and all honour.
A US withdrawal from NATO, would leave a big gap in Europe’ s defences, without several years of notice of so.
You cannot boot the US out of NATO, there is no way to remove a nation from NATO and its set up so essentially the US administers and controls NATO so without the US the NATO treaty cannot work and Europe would need to build a whole new defensive alliance.
To be honest, I am surprised that commentators here at UKDJ and other sites like this, seem to be so surprised or shocked, at the possibility of the US ‘withdrawal’ from NATO.
Again to be honest, why should they continue to ‘prop up a defence organisation’, where other countries shirk their responsibilities, and contribute far less than they should?
I think Trump is looking at his long term legacy right now. With his ‘bold boasts’ about bringing peace to Ukraine, NATO/Europe have been caught with their trousers down, insofar as they are only waking up to the realistic prospects of a negotiated peace.
As for Trumps talk about turning Gaza into a new Dubai or Disney Land, Hamas will not allow it.
You do realise that NATO fought a 20 year long set of wars in support of the US. The UK spent around 70 billion dollars, sent around 150,000 service personnel to active combat zones, suffered 10,000 casualties and 800 deaths supporting a set of US wars.. that’s not freeloading.. the MAGA dialogue is a false narrative. Europe is where it is because..
1) the UK blew its defence spending on US wars.
2) NATO is designed so the US has control of it, the US designed it that way because it did not want a geopolitical competition from Europe. Europe accepted that because it had no choice after ww2 and with the USSR on its doorstep.. the US used that for its advantage for 70 years.
What trump has done is profoundly idiotic for America geopolitics and geostrategic needs he’s essentially pushing Europe to a neutral status with the US.. when the US is now the nation that’s face to face with a peer ideological driven superpower.
Trump appears to do exactly as he pleases, congress is seemingly as powerless as the Duma in facing down Putin. America needs to be seen as the enemy to this country it is becoming. Starmer should ban all MPs and cabinet ministers especially that utter clod head Lamey from ever saying the words “special relationship”. It was always a fantasy and is long gone. People also need to put the blame where it belongs too despite the fact he acting like a dictator, a significant number of utter morons voted him in just as the Russians “vote’ for Putin
Trump 2025 has turned out to be worse than his severest critics could have imagined. But he really doesn’t have the power to do what he says he wants. It is congress that controls the defence budget and there is little chance that congressmen and senators will vote to cut military bases and defence manufacturing in their districts/ states. As commander in chief he could end all deployments to Europe and close all US bases. NATO membership is again something controlled by congress not the president. Withdrawal would require a 2/3rds supermajority in the senate or an act of congress. Already, some republicans are voicing concern about some of Trump’s dafter ambitions.
But there is no doubt that under Trump, the commitment to the collective security of NATO has been undermined. No European country can now be confident that if it invoked Article 5, the USA would respond.
The peace dividend years following the collapse of the USSR have ended. But the strategic position, even without US support, is so much more favourable than pre 1989. Former members of the Warsaw Pact are now democratic enemies of Russia. Scandinavia is fully part of ENATO.
For most members, a rise in spending to 3% of GDP would be enough to ensure ENATO would comfortably defeat Russia in any conventional war.
Longer term, Britain and France might need to increase their nuclear forces to compensate for the loss of the US umbrella.