Will the war on Iran sign NATO’s death certificate?

The results of the war on Iran have revealed the high level of cracks and imbalances within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The war may end soon, as US President Donald Trump has indicated that the most difficult part is over, following the complete destruction of Iran's core capabilities. But what about the fate of NATO?

This alliance, officially founded on April 4, 1949, dominated the global military arena after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, in recent years, it has appeared to be faltering, amid a widespread belief that it will—sooner or later—meet the same fate as its former rival, the "Warsaw Pact," albeit with differences.

The Trump Era and the Widening Rift

The signs of NATO's fragmentation are not new, but they intensified with Trump’s second arrival at the White House. The war on Iran has clearly exposed a rift between the United States and the major powers within the alliance—specifically France, Britain, and Spain—particularly regarding the sharing of the war's burden and the definition of strategic priorities.

While US-European disputes over NATO began as early as the 1960s, they were limited and controlled before turning into a deep structural conflict after the Cold War, reaching a climax during Trump’s first presidency in 2017. Although the war in Ukraine restored some cohesion within the alliance, disagreements persisted on many issues.

"Learn to Fight for Yourselves"

In a harsh and stern message to his European allies, Trump said explicitly: “Learn to fight for yourselves; America will no longer be there to help you.” This marks a radical shift in his doctrine, which links the security umbrella to the actual contribution of allies in military operations and their direct funding.

In this context, Trump recently complained about the lack of French cooperation in the war on Iran, asserting that Paris was unhelpful to Washington. He also accused London of failing to secure its own aviation fuel due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. He even mocked Britain’s refusal to participate in "decapitating" the Iranian regime’s leadership, ridiculing their need to buy fuel from the United States and demanding they "gather their courage" and take their oil by force from the Strait.

While London has not announced any intention to send ships to the Strait of Hormuz, it confirmed that it is currently discussing a range of options with allies and partners to ensure maritime security in the region. This hesitant British position did not please Trump at all; he criticized and mocked it, labeling it an act of "betrayal."

The "Paper Tiger" and the Future of the Alliance

Amidst all this, Washington is preparing in earnest for ground military operations in Iran. Meanwhile, Tehran is convinced that negotiations were never fruitful and were merely a "cover for strategic deception" in preparation for a ground invasion, according to Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.

There is no doubt that NATO is currently passing through a delicate stage characterized by a "decline in internal cohesion" rather than being on the brink of immediate collapse. Trump’s recent statements reveal a US trend toward reducing the traditional commitment to European security, linking support to the extent of allies' contributions to the war on Iran. This weakens the principle of "Collective Defense" upon which the alliance was founded.

Trump went even further, telling the British Daily Telegraph: "I am seriously considering withdrawing from NATO after its failure to join our war on Iran," describing the alliance as a "paper tiger."

Adaptation or Dissolution?

In contrast, Europeans appear reluctant to engage in external military adventures, preferring more cautious approaches, which further widens the gap within NATO. However, NATO is not the Warsaw Pact; it is unlikely to meet the same dramatic fate. Instead, it is inevitable that the alliance will enter a phase of reshaping its features through a redistribution of roles and an increasing European tendency toward defense independence.

The bottom line is that NATO will not vanish, but it will inevitably change. Its ability to adapt to geopolitical shifts will determine the features of its future. If Trump carries out what is on his mind, it will force Europe to bear the responsibility for its own security more than ever before.