Senior European diplomats are set to brief Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby on Thursday, seeking to reassure him that European nations are increasing their defense commitments amid uncertainty surrounding a U.S. review of its troop presence on the continent. The review, initiated in June, has prompted concerns among NATO allies about Washington's long-term commitment to the alliance and its strategic aims.
U.S. President Donald Trump has previously voiced frustration over European defense spending, pushing for allies to assume greater responsibility. The current review, led by Colby, is being closely watched by European capitals, with officials expressing a lack of clarity on whether it represents a genuine consultation or a predetermined decision. One European official noted, "We don't know if it's a real exercise or if a decision has already been taken."
Colby is expected to present the U.S. administration's findings and intentions to NATO ambassadors in Brussels. The U.S. currently stations approximately 80,000 troops in Europe and has recently announced troop withdrawals and reductions in forces assigned to NATO defense plans. The review's goals, as outlined in circulated documents, include enhancing U.S. access, basing, and overflight capabilities in Europe, while also incentivizing European allies to lead in continental defense.
NATO members have received a questionnaire probing issues such as defense spending, strategy, procurement, and support for U.S. foreign policy. Questions specifically ask about any restrictions on U.S. access, basing, and overflight, and willingness to reduce them, as well as support for transatlantic defense industrial cooperation. Estonian Defence Minister Hanno Pevkur confirmed his country is preparing its response, stating, "Estonia shares the view that Europe needs to do more for its own defence."
Colby stated the review aims to advance NATO 3.0, focusing on clarity, rigor, and readiness. However, some European diplomats perceive the U.S. approach as transactional, linking basing issues to political stances and potentially creating competition among allies for U.S. attention. Despite some "promising signals" and extensive responses submitted by certain nations, there remains a sentiment that Colby may not be the ultimate decision-maker, with potential for higher-level overrules.