BRUSSELS — U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth delivered a blunt rebuke to NATO’s European allies Thursday, using a gathering of defense ministers to announce a sweeping six-month Pentagon review of American forces stationed in Europe and to demand a fundamental transformation of the alliance into what the Trump administration is calling “NATO 3.0.”
The remarks, delivered at NATO headquarters in Brussels, represented the sharpest rhetorical attack on the alliance by a senior member of the Trump cabinet in recent memory, and underscored the deepening rift between the United States and its European partners over burden-sharing, military readiness, and the continent’s role in the Iran conflict.
Allies Denied U.S. Forces Access to Strike Iran, Hegseth Says
At the core of Hegseth’s fury was European refusal to grant American forces predictable access to bases from which to launch strikes on Iran during the recent Hormuz campaign. “These allies put America’s sons and daughters at risk by denying them the predictable access, basing and overflight that never should have been in question at all,” Hegseth told his counterparts, calling the refusal “shameful.”
The dispute marks a dangerous new fault line in transatlantic relations. For decades, the presence of U.S. forces on European soil was taken as a symbol of allied solidarity. Now, the same basing infrastructure has become a point of contention.
Several European nations refused to allow their territory to be used as launchpads for strikes against Iran, citing concerns about regional stability and fears that such operations could drag Europe further into a wider Middle Eastern conflict.
A NATO 3.0 Reboot or American Retreat?
The Trump administration says the review is designed to ensure that NATO moves “fast and irreversibly toward Europe leading” — a phrase that diplomats on both sides of the Atlantic interpreted as Washington preparing to reduce its own frontline commitment to European defense.
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte pushed back against the framing, pointing to a $90 billion surge in European defense spending last year — a 20 percent increase over 2024. “Europe is stepping up,” Rutte said. “The numbers speak for themselves.”
But the numbers have not been enough to satisfy the Trump administration. On June 3, the United States informed allies it would no longer supply an aircraft carrier group, aerial refueling aircraft, and dozens of fighter jets in the event of a European crisis — a decision that sent shockwaves through NATO’s planning apparatus. NATO’s supreme allied commander, an American, has since been directed to draw up backup plans that assume a significantly reduced U.S. footprint.
The implications are stark. Under NATO’s Article 5, an attack on one ally is considered an attack on all. But the provision does not obligate any member to provide military support — a legal distinction that becomes enormously consequential when the United States, with the alliance’s most powerful military, is signaling it may not come running.
Nuclear Deterrence and America’s Extended Umbrella
To counter fears that the review signals a broader American withdrawal, NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group issued a rare joint statement Thursday — its first in 19 years. The statement “recalled that the strategic nuclear forces of the Alliance remain the supreme guarantee of Allied security,” language designed to reassure eastern European members who depend on the American nuclear umbrella.
Allies agreed to accelerate work on modernizing NATO’s nuclear capabilities and strengthening nuclear planning. Whether that is sufficient to reassure nervous capitals in Warsaw, Tallinn, and Bucharest remains an open question.
European governments are scrambling to fill gaps in air defense, naval capacity, and intelligence sharing that were once seamlessly provided by the United States. A proposed joint European defense fund, long stalled by disagreements between France, Germany, and eastern members, has suddenly gained new urgency.
Hegseth lambasted European migration policy, gender equality initiatives, and climate commitments as distractions from core defense responsibilities. European officials privately expressed frustration that the Pentagon chief appeared to be using the Brussels podium to score political points at home. The six-month review begins immediately, and its conclusions will reshape the alliance’s future.