BERLIN/WASHINGTON, June 12, 2026 — A sweeping reduction in U.S. military assets assigned to NATO operations in Europe is drawing alarm from allies and lawmakers on both sides of the Atlantic, with a senior German politician declaring there is “no longer any faith” that President Donald Trump would come to Europe’s aid in an emergency, and the Republican chairmen of both congressional armed services committees warning the cuts risk sending “the wrong signal to Vladimir Putin.”
“NATO’s main problem is that, as long as Trump is president, there is no longer any faith that the U.S. would come to the Europeans’ aid in the event of an emergency,” said Anton Hofreiter, a member of the German Bundestag, responding to the New York Times report on the planned U.S. force reductions.
What the Cuts Entail
The Trump administration’s plans, communicated to NATO allies in early June through a written document reviewed by the New York Times, include cutting F-16 and F-15E fighter jets available for NATO operations from approximately 150 to 100, reducing maritime reconnaissance aircraft from 26 to 15, withdrawing all eight aerial refueling tankers, and reallocating a carrier strike group, a missile-launching submarine, several warships, and one bomber group from European defense missions.
The Pentagon has declined to comment on specific numbers but acknowledged the cuts in general terms through U.S. European Command, which said it intended to reduce U.S. commitments in Europe. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell framed the reductions as an “opportunity for allies to demonstrate that they have heard President Trump’s call for them to step up and take primary responsibility for Europe’s conventional defense.”
Congressional Alarm — From Both Parties
The Republican chairmen of the Senate and House armed services committees — Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi and Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama — issued a joint warning earlier this month that prematurely reducing U.S. military capabilities in Europe risked “sending the wrong signal to Vladimir Putin.” The statement was notable for its directness, coming from the chairs of the committees responsible for overseeing Pentagon policy rather than from opposition Democrats.
Rogers subsequently proposed legislation requiring a formal report on “the analytical basis” for the cutbacks from Elbridge Colby, the Defense Department’s top policy official, and Gen. Dan Caine, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The legislation would compel the Pentagon to show Congress that the cuts account for Russia’s current military capabilities and the alliance’s warfighting plans before they take effect.
The extent of congressional concern — with the armed services committee chairmen of both chambers pushing back on a Republican administration’s defense decisions — underscores how far the cuts go beyond what even many GOP lawmakers expected.
Britain’s Defense Secretary Quits
The U.S. drawdown announcement coincided with a significant political rupture in Britain. British Defense Secretary Grant Shapps resigned Thursday, accusing the government of spending too little on its military — a decision that came as European nations are under intense pressure to accelerate defense spending to compensate for anticipated U.S. reductions.
Britain is one of NATO’s two nuclear powers and has historically been among the most capable European contributors to alliance operations. Shapps’s resignation over defense spending levels signals the political difficulty European governments face in rapidly filling the gaps that U.S. reductions will create, even as their populations and parliaments demand action.
Germany Pulls Out of Fighter Jet Project
Germany compounded European defense concerns on Tuesday by confirming its withdrawal from the Future Combat Air System — a next-generation fighter jet development project it had been pursuing jointly with France and Spain. The withdrawal from one of Europe’s flagship defense industrial cooperation programs undermines the narrative that European nations are moving swiftly and cohesively to build the independent defense capabilities that U.S. reductions require.
The combination of the U.S. drawdown announcement, Britain’s defense secretary resignation, and Germany’s fighter jet withdrawal in the same week painted a difficult picture for European defense planners trying to reassure publics that the continent can defend itself without full American backing.
The Russia Backdrop
The alarm comes at a particularly sensitive moment. In late May, a Russian drone struck an apartment building in Galați, Romania — the first such strike in a major urban area in NATO territory — injuring two civilians. Combined with repeated Russian drone incursions into Romanian and Polish airspace, the incidents have heightened European concern that Russia may be testing NATO’s response thresholds.
Ed Arnold of the Royal United Services Institute in London said the drawdown “will have the effect of focusing minds” — a diplomatic understatement for a situation in which NATO’s eastern members, who share borders with Russia or Belarus, are watching the most significant reduction in American military commitment to Europe in generations unfold in real time.
“The big question is will there be a transition period for Europe to adjust to the new trimmed down U.S. commitments?” said Jim Townsend, a former senior Pentagon official on NATO policy. “Will the U.S. military be able to hold to a long implementation timeline when the boss wants to punish allies now?”