In the recent Vol. 166 N0.19 issue of the Eagle & Journal a respected and honorable member of the Coronado community expressed his opinion on why the U.S. should no longer consider NATO important.
Capt. Austin’s arguments have some economic and managerial validity, but I respectfully suggest that he is missing the “big picture”.
Critics often point to the high financial cost of supporting NATO, but this argument reflects a narrow accounting view rather than a strategic one. The United States does not fund NATO as an act of charity; it invests in it as a force multiplier for national security, economic stability, and global influence.
First, deterrence is far less expensive than war. NATO’s integrated military structure and collective defense commitment significantly reduce the likelihood of large-scale conflict in Europe—conflict that the United States would almost certainly be drawn into at far greater cost in lives and resources.
Second, NATO is not a one-way financial transfer. Allied nations provide critical infrastructure, basing access, intelligence, and operational capabilities that would be prohibitively expensive for the United States to replicate independently. The alliance effectively distributes both risk and operational burden.
Third, NATO secures the stability of the transatlantic economy—the largest economic relationship in the world. Peace and predictability in Europe underpin global markets, supply chains, and energy flows that directly benefit the U.S. economy.
Fourth, the alliance amplifies American power diplomatically and militarily. Coordinated sanctions, intelligence sharing, and unified responses to crises carry far greater weight than unilateral action.
Finally, the alternative to NATO is not savings—it is increased instability, greater risk of regional conflict, potential nuclear proliferation among allies, and ultimately higher long-term costs for the United States.
In strategic terms, NATO remains one of the most cost-effective investments in U.S. national security. The question is not whether it is expensive, but whether the United States can afford the far greater costs of its absence.
Our efforts with NATO should focus on supporting and enhancing its strong points and minimizing and removing its identifiable deficiencies. The USA’s abandonment of NATO is Russian President Putin’s “dream come true”.
VOL. 116, NO. 20 – May 20, 2026