Lauren Speranza, Fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis, told peers that Washington expects Britain to assume a stronger leadership role in NATO while retaining the flexibility to engage in global security issues such as the Indo-Pacific.
Speaking before the House of Lords International Relations and Defence Committee, she described how the US is redefining its global military posture, with implications for the UK’s strategic priorities.
“We are still awaiting the release of the US national security strategy and the national defense strategy, which is likely to be followed by a global posture review,” Speranza said. “It is expected that there may be a bit of withdrawal of capability from the European continent, but the US has been clear that it plans to continue extending the nuclear umbrella and is looking for additional European contributions in the conventional sense.”
She warned that “the risk that some US capabilities will move out of the continent is not zero,” and said this shift increases the expectation that the UK will step up. “This Administration would like to see the UK take on a stronger leadership role in NATO—not just on spending but on rallying other allies to do more on European security issues—and contribute to NATO missions.”
Speranza pointed to Britain’s leadership of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group and its involvement in recent NATO missions such as Eastern Sentry and Baltic Sentry as examples of the kind of engagement Washington wants to see continue.
Pressed by Baroness Crawley about US expectations for Britain beyond Europe, Speranza said opinions differ across the American government. “The White House might have a different view from the Pentagon,” she said, “but broadly speaking, because the UK has only so many resources, forces and capabilities, the Department of Defense has encouraged it to focus on the European theatre and reduce its involvement elsewhere in the world, including in the Indo-Pacific.”
Still, she added that “there are places where the US would likely welcome limited contributions from the UK—in the Persian Gulf or in the Indo-Pacific through AUKUS, particularly if there is a crisis.” That balance, she suggested, marks a shift from the previous US Administration, which viewed the Indo-Pacific and European theatres as strategically linked and urged allies like Britain to bridge the two regions. “It is possible that another Administration could seek to return to an approach more focused on functional domains of competition that necessitate closer cooperation between the UK and regions outside Europe,” she said.
Speranza concluded that Britain’s long-term challenge will be to remain adaptable while maintaining its NATO focus. “The UK likely needs to maintain some level of flexibility to adapt to different approaches,” she said. “It is in the UK’s interest to maintain its relationships around the world and protect its sovereign interests, while being responsive to US signals where it makes sense.”
She praised the UK’s 2025 Strategic Defence Review as striking the right balance. “It prioritises a NATO-first, but not NATO-only, approach,” she said, “emphasising readiness to return forces to Europe where necessary.”
While Europe remains the focus, the review also recognises the importance of the Indo-Pacific and Middle East as “secondary priorities” and identifies growing challenges from China in areas such as technology competition.
The UK has barely the resources to look after the UK
One has to consider that the USA has no ships, just two brigades and only four fighter squadrons in Europe, so how much more can they reduce until they become completely irrelevant?
Countries like Finland and Poland with their large and expanding forces have become far more important for European security than the USA.
It’s useful to have the USA in NATO as the ultimate deterrent especially through strategic weapons but in terms of hard power guarding Europe it’s increasingly irrelevant and it los paints a massive target in Europes back with animosity with China.
I for one am personally quite happy with the new role the USA sees for itself, Europe and the UK. Also as the US retreats further from democracy it’s going to be harder for us to maintain such a close alliance with them.
makes sense I suppose. there have u been many exercises for the armed forces of Europe to work and train together and we can trust in a coordinated and coherent response to any threat.
Great word now let us see the capital investment in equipment and personnel otherwise it is all word salad!!!
The UK acts according to it’s own interests, not those of an incompetent autocracy with a giant stick.
“The UK acts according to it’s own interests”
Recent evidence (last 15+ years) would suggest the opposite
You’re absolutely right of course. Let me change that to “The UK *should* act according to it’s own interests”.
This transactional approach they’re pursuing works both ways. They can’t withdraw from their security commitment in Europe at such a critical moment, and still presume to dictate terms to Europeans.
The last time the UK engaged in the Pacific with the Americans, it was all but expelled from their history books. So, what is it we are to be ready for?
The tendency to shoot yourself in the foot is a signature characteristic of the British national psyche. HS2, ‘oven ready’ Brexit deals, paranoid levels of Covid lockdown, 5000+ new applications per day for disability benefit, serial screw ups in defence contracts. The list is endless. “ I didn’t get where I am today Weggie, without being able to spot a case of suppressed anger and resentment.”
“US wants it’s allies to look after themselves without help, but be ready to die for the US in the Pacific.”
That’s the plan 🫡🇺🇸
😂
Sounds like Maga logic right there
yet another example of the American arrogance telling us how to run our affairs
Until this dishonest government pulls its finger out which I doubt. We will have trouble defending anything. Apparently the MOD has overspent by 2 billion on fresh air.
So, should it be Argus that goes to Brazil rather than Albion? Should we have 2 dozen more Typhoons and should we make an offer for Oman’s CR2 tanks?
We await the next thrilling instalment of the defence industry plan.
One word, “banjaxed”.
I think we have heard that before.. essentially it’s a message of stay in your own back yard and let the US do as it will but be prepared to lend a hand if we need you.
Sorry US the UK has its own strategic interests across the world and our own strategic partnerships with nations such as Japan, Australia etc, we have real estate in the pacific ( be it very small and pointless) but we also have a huge stake in the south Atlantic, Antarctic and South America continental shelf as well a very significant history in Africa and the western Indian Ocean..
So yes you can want the UK to leave you to hover all the trade deals and capture all the resources you can in deals for the US..but the UK needs to an will pursuer its interests first..and one of those interests is European security, but European security comes from world wide engagement..which is what the UK is very good at..
Let Germany and Poland lead on the security of the NATO eastern boarder..they have the most skin in the game and are perfectly able ( maybe the US issue is that Germany and Poland are a bit less pliant to the US and focused on the needs of the EU, its strategic competitor). The UK can lead on what it does naval power and seaways as well as global influence.
It really is past time European nations found their geostrategic gumption again and Europe as a single voice started to exerted more power and influence in the world. WW2 and its multi generational trauma is now past.. the US is not “medicine” Europe needs to get over itself. It’s not as catchy as American first but I’m all up for “Western and eastern and Central European liberal democracies first and the relationship with everyone else should be enlightened self interest only.
For me that means a very solid and fair zero tariff trade zone and a very solid European defence alliance that is developed to protect and promote European world wide security and interests.. so not just if Russia crosses a line, but if any South American countries and alliances decide to say attack the Falklands.. when the Antarctic opens.. a recognition and support of the UKs BAT and Norways and Frances claims. The European democratic nations have standing and justified claims for 32% of Antarctic..based on the fundamental principles of we found it we planned the flag on it and died exploring it and morally no other buggers ever lived their or had been their before. Also how will Europe take its rightful share of the high north.. because at the moment the US and Russia/china plan to take it all.
The need is to be based on European nations offering each other absolute support and always being on the side of other European democracies over any other nations interests..I know we like the Anglo sphere, but our own future is fundamentally based around a powerful set of prosperous European democracies that get on and treat each other like family..when European nations start competing against each other on the world stage it ends in staggering levels of blood spilt in Europe ( this is the one reason I supported the EU, even though I firmly believed it needed total reform and to stop going anywhere near political unification… it needed to be a military and economic alliance).
For the sake of global power the UK needs good relationships with the Anglosphere and commonwealth, France needs good relations with its colonies and Spain and Portugal needs to leaver its South American relations.. but within theses relationships their should always be a Europe first approach.
Sadly the world is splitting we are seeing the development of a Chinese/russian/North Korean power block, the U.S. is now an American first power block that is essentially seeing a complete collapse in its relationship with its other Anglo sphere northern neighbour and wider allies, India is sailing its course of armed neutrality, the western Pacific democracies are scrambling to understand where they fit in the sandwich that is an ongoing Sino US conflict that may/will go hot at some point.
Basically Europe has a decision to make ( including us) will it stay a squabbling set of Meduim sized nations that are slowly emasculated by large power blocks and essentially become a richer more comfortable version of Africa ( essentially a playground for the US and china Russia powerblocks to play geopolitics and geostrategic games over.) will it create a cast iron Europe only defence alliance, arm up to the hilt tell the world to piss off and live in glorious isolation ( heavy armed neutrality.. but at risk of strangulation by the new worlds power blocks). Or will it get over itself lever the fact it has about 23% of the worlds wealth and resources and become its own power block focused on its own world wide interests ( as a group) over all others.
Now the UK may try and stay independent.. but the reality is it’s going to have to play in one power groups pond.. and let’s be honest the US does not seem to like or play fair with anyone, china are a bunch of nationalists communists who will use anyone and anything to the advantage of china and only china, Russia and its satellites are very unpleasant and unpredictable fascists and the western pacific democracies are simply to far away to be true allies… so the Uk and European nations better start playing better with each other and showing more unified gumption..
Why should the UK care about what the US wants