Posted on 04/25/2026 7:29:10 AM PDT by MinorityRepublican
Britain and France should lead a new 'European Nato' to take responsibility for Europe's defence without help from the United States, an ex-Nato chief has said.
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the organisation's secretary-general from 2009 to 2014, said a new security architecture was needed after Donald Trump threatened to withdraw from Nato.
Mr Rasmussen has suggested expanding the Coalition of the Willing - an alliance of 35 countries set up to defend Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire - so it can take over Europe's conventional defence role.
He identified France and Britain as the leading members of an expanded alliance, citing their nuclear capabilities as a key factor.
At present, the coalition is headquartered in Paris, with plans to relocate to London after its first 12 months of operation.
Mr Rusmussen's comments come following President Trump's expression of 'doubts' about his commitment to Nato and Article 5 - the mutual defence clause stating that an attack on one member is an attack on all - the European pillar of Nato must be strengthened.
The coalition, including Kyiv, is currently preparing a post-war deployment intended to deter further Russian aggression against Ukraine.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.com ...
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA, JOKE!
Yeah. Do that.
Britain lead? What are they supposed to lead? They have one operational ship. The rest of their Navy is barely able to sail the high seas.
France is not much better. They have nuclear weapons but VERY limited conventional capabilities.
Both countries have already been taken over by the mullahs. Just look at London and Paris. Only thing missing is the camels. /spit
It’s like the retards jumped off the short bus with the goal of forming their own school.
Britain really doesn’t have anything to add to a defense coalition. No functional navy, a limited air force 47 F-35B, and probably around 70 or so operational Typhoons. and no significant ground force (around 20,000 combat troops, around 50,000 rear echelon.)
Good-by Europe!
> Britain lead? What are they supposed to lead? <
Mark Felton did a series of YouTube videos on the pathetic state of the UK military.
The UK now has more admiral than warships.
https://youtu.be/po9duwvipB0?si=FnQvDHQW6vzIdYbg
And more horses than main battle tanks.
https://youtu.be/e4TmtkjcY9A?si=DONhIz1UjQFbFoqh
It’s a shame Monty Python is no longer active. They could have had a lot of fun with this.
Really? I didn't know it was THAT bad.
Yep , NATO would be DEAD Jim
Sounds like a great idea. Britain can hire tug boats to get their navy to a conflict and France can supply the white flags. /s/
I see the potential for NATO to start collapsing from within.
Then Germany and Italy can be the axis powers?
“He identified France and Britain as the leading members of an expanded alliance, citing their nuclear capabilities as a key factor.”
That’s the scary part. Imagine the muzzie hordes out voting the British and French and gaining control of their nukes.
Going to be hard to lead while in a demographic death spiral into dhimmitude.
Yea, right, the incapable (U.K.) and the unwilling (France) minus the chief industrialist (Germany) should lead a Europe-only “NATO”?
Upon their first major engagement such an outfit should simply surrender.
Money talks, BS walks.
Sounds like a great idea to me!
Collectively, the Europeans, including the non-NATO countries, have military that can easily handle Russia and come easily on top, if war became necessary. War is not just about weapons, it’s also about economies, and the total GDP of Europe makes Russia seem minuscule in comparison.
And if conventional forces were to be compared, Europe can match anything Russia can throw at them, with jet-p;anes and tanks and whatever else is needed.
The UK and French navies and the navies of other Europeans, won’t be an issue, not against Russia which has virtually no navy and has had to pull them out from the waters near Ukraine, which has destroyed anything from Russia that floats and could be reached by missiles and drones.
There is an even greater lack in airlift capacity for moving troops, equipment supplies, refueling planes, AWACS, etc. Same with helicopters, missiles, anti-missile/aircraft systems, space-based guidance and surveillance systems, satellites, etc. British and French troops are great — they just lack numbers and resources. Where the money to catch up would come from is a mystery. Perhaps they think drones will bail them out on the cheap.
Germany recently announced intentions to have the largest military in Europe (by 2039!) — I presume this notion of British/French leadership is a response to that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.