Finnish President Claims Europe Can 'Unequivocally' Defend Itself Without US
Donald Trump's opposition to the US continuing to bankroll NATO has become a defining issue in global politics, so much so that a considerable percentage of time and energy at the ongoing Davos conference has been spent talking about it.
During a panel discussion on Europe’s defense capabilities with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and Polish President Karol Nawrocki, Finnish President Alexander Stubb argued that Europe 'unequivocally' has the ability to defend itself without US support.
The claim coincides with the Finnish leader's assertion that a " new world order" is rising with the UN at the helm. The suggestion has, of course, drawn scrutiny as being overly optimistic.
NOW - Finland's President, Alexander Stubb, says Europe can "unequivocally" defend itself, without the Americans. pic.twitter.com/AeHFshxBr5
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) January 21, 2026
Stubb's argument hinges largely on Finland's military reliance on the mandatory conscription of at least 1 million citizens.
It also assumes other European nations will be able to do the same. Conscription propaganda in the EU and UK has become commonplace in the past couple of years, and European leaders have been lamenting the lack of interest among citizens to volunteer for service.
Finland and the majority of EU nations rely heavily on US weapons systems and military personnel with the expertise to use those systems. Then there is the extensive abilities of US intelligence resources from satellites to covert assets.
In the case of the war in Ukraine, it was largely US resources and intel that stopped Ukraine from being completely overrun by Russian forces. European governments have been taking a larger part in this role since Donald Trump's return to office, but the fact remains that Russia is not fighting Ukraine so much as it is fighting NATO in Ukraine and NATO is backstopped by the US.
This has led European leaders to misrepresent Russia's capabilities; downplaying their gains in Ukraine and ignoring their attrition warfare methods which have been grinding down the Ukrainian military. European elites know that Ukraine is losing despite NATO aid, which is why they have been pushing for conscription and the deployment of troops to the Ukrainian theater. A possible motive may also be their hope that this will force the US to also deploy ground forces.
The reality is, Europe has little to no industrial capacity needed to sustain a large scale war lasting years rather than months. They have also been quietly and quickly destroying their own energy production capabilities in the name of "climate change." Even worse, most Europeans citizens have no intention of dying in the trenches for governments that have openly sought to replace them with third world immigrants. Recruitment will be difficult or impossible.
A key problem is the fact that European nations have grown comfortable in the shade of America's security umbrella. They rely almost exclusively on the US as a deterrent to Russian invasion (which is highly unlikely without European provocation). The vast majority of NATO's defensive capability is reliant on US military spending. And, because the US foots the bill for Europe's defense, they are free to spend exorbitant budgets on social welfare programs like subsidized healthcare while making fun of Americans for having to pay high prices for doctor's visits.
Meanwhile, progressive European governments have grown increasingly hostile to free speech and freedom in general. The crackdown against conservative and "anti-immigration" discourse has placed the EU and UK in direct confrontation with the Trump Administration. The arrests of citizens for "crimes" as innocuous as flying a national flag or posting memes on social media in the name of "not offending people" brings into question whether or not Americans and Europeans are ideological enemies rather than friends.
EU governments clearly want to convince their respective populations that Europe can survive without the US. The claim is delusional.
Trump's battles over NATO membership are hindered by the fact that the President requires a two-thirds senate vote to withdraw from the agreement. However, his efforts to acquire Greenland present on interesting scenario. If Trump forces the sale of Greenland (or takes Greenland by force), European governments will effectively end the NATO alliance themselves. In other words, Trump won't need a Senate vote.
The general reaction from many conservatives to the threat of a broken NATO alliance is "good riddance". Why should Americans continue to spend their tax dollars and risk their lives coddling Europe? It's a response the Europeans do not seem to understand.