O’Hanlon: A weakened NATO would be bad for everyone, but the Balkans would not be at immediate risk

It would be bad for everyone to see a weakened NATO, but even in that case the Balkans would be somewhat removed from immediate risk and danger, believes American security and foreign policy expert Michael O’Hanlon.

He argues that anyone who claims the United States and the European Union have already split is mistaken—unless Europeans themselves decide to do so. Even then, he does not see such a scenario, particularly in security terms, because, as he notes, Europe is not in a position to defend itself without the United States.

In an interview with Kosovo Online, speaking about how vulnerable small Western Balkan countries might be if key allies no longer act in a coordinated manner, O’Hanlon said the Balkans are not at the greatest risk, adding that he is more concerned about the Baltic states due to Russia’s influence.

He added that it is in the interest of the United States to have a strong and united Europe as a partner.

Are we witnessing a real strategic rift between the U.S. and Europe, or merely temporary political turbulence?

We don’t know. Donald Trump is too unpredictable. I think anyone who says we have already split is mistaken. We have not split yet—unless Europeans decide to split—and while I wouldn’t blame them for being angry with the United States, I really don’t think Europe has that option, especially in security terms. I do not think Europe is in a position to defend the entire EU or NATO-Europe without the United States.

So I don’t think Europe should prematurely assume that the alliance is somehow ending or that transatlantic relations have already fundamentally changed. On the other hand, the past month has been very painful and shocking in demonstrating that the United States under Donald Trump is not the same country it was before—at least for the next three years. His willingness to talk about taking over Greenland was extraordinary and certainly very unsettling and concerning. If that kind of language, threat, or idea appears again, then I think anything is possible.

How vulnerable are small Western Balkan countries when major allies no longer act in a coordinated way (security, diplomacy, economic investment…)?

I don’t think the Balkans are in the greatest danger. I am more concerned about the Baltic states and perhaps the Suwałki Corridor in Poland—other places where Russia might be tempted to exploit influence in an effort to reclaim parts of what was once the Russian Empire or the Soviet Union. These are areas where Russian forces are close, and where there are many historical grievances and rationalizations.

So it would not be good for anyone to see a weakened transatlantic alliance, but I think the Balkans would be somewhat removed from immediate risk and danger.

If U.S. foreign policy becomes more “transactional” under Trump, what does that mean for those who rely on principled alliances, such as Kosovo?

I wouldn’t worry too much about the whole idea of a “transactional” United States, because, frankly, most countries are transactional most of the time under any leader—Donald Trump or not—and they look after their own interests.

In that sense, I think Donald Trump was eager just two weeks ago to boast that NATO is stronger than ever under his presidency. I’m not sure that is true, but he is now taking credit for NATO’s strength—and NATO is a collective organization designed to work in our shared interest.

So I don’t think we should overstate the idea that the United States has suddenly become purely transactional, whereas previously it cared only about collective goods. That is an exaggeration of how much things have changed.

Should the Western Balkans double down on Euro-Atlantic integration—or begin diversifying partnerships in a multipolar world?

I think we should keep Europe strong and united as a partner of the United States, but also as a bloc that can protect itself—economically, and perhaps especially militarily.

So if by diversification you mean that the Balkans should start forming close friendships with China and Russia, I would say no. But if you mean maintaining extensive trade relations around the world, while also working toward a more capable Europe as a group and as an entity, then I think the answer is yes.