European leaders gathered at the NATO summit in Ankara with one of their central themes, framed as making "Europe and NATO stronger", focused on producing US weapons in Europe and increasing the continent's contribution to NATO's budget.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte announced that member states, in cooperation with major US and European defense companies, will begin manufacturing some of the most important US weapons systems on European soil. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz also said that by increasing defense spending, European allies would make NATO "more European," enabling the alliance to preserve its transatlantic character.
As part of this approach, Merz announced that, with Washington's approval, Berlin will purchase Tomahawk long-range cruise missiles and Typhon ground-based launch systems from the US and deploy them in Germany. At the same time, Reuters reported that the US is negotiating with Germany and other European countries to jointly produce Raytheon's AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles and establish a European maintenance center for Lockheed Martin's Patriot PAC-3 missiles.
NATO's latest report also shows that the alliance's combined defense spending will exceed $1.8 trillion in 2026, reflecting US demands for Europe to shoulder a larger share of NATO's costs.
Presented as a demonstration of NATO's strength and Europe's enhanced security role, these developments in reality reflect, on one hand, Europe's growing subordination to the US, a trend that undermines the vision of an "independent Europe", and, on the other, lend legitimacy to what the author describes as the terrorist and criminal nature of US policy. According to this view, the US has replaced dialogue under international law with the logic of force, and the West should be held accountable for its role in undermining the international order and legal norms.
From Strategic Dependence to US Arms Factory, New Chapter in Europe’ s Humiliation
Although European leaders argue that manufacturing US weapons will strengthen NATO and Europe's defense capabilities, the reality is that the move is less a demonstration of European power than a clear symbol of a new phase in the continent's subordination to the US, the same country whose president, Donald Trump, has repeatedly described Europe as weak, ineffective, and incapable, while expressing disappointment with NATO and its European allies.
By requiring the production of US weapons and ammunition in Europe, Trump is shifting manufacturing costs onto European countries, a move that could further aggravate the continent's economic challenges. At the same time, it reinforces the notion that Europe lacks both the capability and the political will to develop its own defense industry and is instead expected to manufacture whatever weapons Washington deems appropriate.
In summary, the decision reached in Ankara is portrayed not as a sign of European strength, but as a clear symbol of Europe's weakness in the face of Trump's demands, a trend that will further erode the continent's global standing.
This sense of subordination is even more evident given that the US has recently imposed steep tariffs on European imports. Yet rather than responding firmly, European leaders have effectively accepted Washington's demands by assuming the role of manufacturers of US weapons.
Europe's Dream of Independence, Casualty of Strategic Dependence on Washington
European leaders' acceptance of US weapons production, which, in practice, is portrayed as yielding to Trump's threats to withdraw US forces from Europe, runs counter to the views of a significant portion of European public opinion. Many Europeans, citing NATO's financial burden and what they see as America's war-driven policies, advocate greater European security and military independence, and related proposals have been debated within European institutions.
The decision adopted in Ankara is presented not only as bypassing European public opinion and decision-making institutions, but also as undermining the vision of an "independent Europe" while entrenching the continent's dependence on the US.
The significance of this issue becomes more apparent, according to the article, when countries such as Iran, Russia, China, and other states with indigenous deterrent capabilities are able to resist US pressure and threats, whereas Europe lacks that resolve. The recent conduct of the NATO secretary general and his insistence on Europe's role in what the article describes as the joint US-Israeli aggression against Iran is presented as another manifestation of that dependence, making NATO, in the author's view, a partner to criminal acts.
When Bullets Replace Dialogue, Threat to Int’l Order, International Law
Europe's insistence on producing US weapons, together with the positions of some countries at the Ankara summit that openly supported US military action against Iran, reflects what the author sees as a dangerous redefinition of the international system, one in which bullets replace dialogue.
According to the article, while these governments seek to whitewash what it describes as US-Israeli terrorism and justify killings, prioritizing higher NATO military spending and expanded weapons production in Europe amounts to abandoning the UN Charter, the principles of international law, and even Europe's own stated legal values, which have traditionally emphasized dialogue over confrontation and military threats.
In other words, the article argues that Europe's current alignment with US militarism and participation in manufacturing American weapons constitutes a direct assault on the international legal order, with potentially serious consequences for global security.
High Cost of Following Washington
The article argues that European leaders' acquiescence to what it describes as US bullying and aggression not only exposes the reality behind Europe's claims of defending human rights, but also reflects not confidence or strength, but a courtier's mentality, the belief that flattery can change a king's contemptuous view.
The central issue, it contends, is that these policies will neither strengthen Europe nor restore its dignity. Instead, they further expose the continent's weakness in the face of Trump's demands.
At a minimum, the article argues, this course will deepen Europe's economic and political challenges while further isolating the European Union internationally. Rather than condemning and confronting US policies, the EU has chosen what the author describes as a path of deference and submission to Trump, effectively becoming unpaid labor for rebuilding and expanding America's military arsenals, arsenals that, according to the article, will be used in future acts of aggression.
Such conduct, the article concludes, has made Europe complicit in US actions and, inevitably, it will have to bear the consequences of that cooperation.
NOURNEWS