This is 1 of the scenarios that NATO is presently facing: it is 22 March 2030. The air pierces the roar of tank engines, artillery thunders in the distance, and swarms of drones emergence to the sky.
The Lithuanian Air Base in Saul is on fire. The heads hit the Polish 22nd Tactical Aviation Base in Malbork. German soldiers search refuge in the military complex in Rudniki, Lithuania. The Russians attack from Królewiec and from Belarus, hitting NATO's defence along the Suwałski Pass at the border of Poland and Lithuania.
While NATO forces in Lithuania and Poland are struggling to halt Russians, the allies are rushing to respond. There are armies in Germany, France, Italy, large Britain and the Nordic countries.
Both leaders and soldiers look westward, to the ocean, hoping for warships that erstwhile came to the rescue of Europe. But Americans aren't coming.
General Hodges: It would be a terrible mistake
Europe has built its war plans to deliver American food rapidly on the front lines. The possible of that not happening, makes NATO's military mobility plans a mess.
Since the formation of NATO in 1949, 1 of the key roles of European allies in the event of a possible conflict has been to defy invasion, while the United States was to gather forces and send troops, equipment and supplies through the Atlantic to win the war. Ports specified as Rotterdam and Antwerp were to be liable for transporting people and resources and directing reinforcements towards the front.
The North Atlantic Alliance planners never imagined NATO without the United States.. For decades, European military logistics has been built on American support. Much of the transport infrastructure on the continent — either built or upgraded during the Cold War — inactive runs from west to east. It was shaped due to the anticipation that American meals would arrive from across the Atlantic.
Some of the most strategical routes on the continent, including a transport corridor extending from the Dutch coast to the Polish Suwałki region, were created by NATO.
— These corridors are of crucial importance due to the fact that they let NATO and our allies to scope the east flank more quickly," said Deputy Minister of Defence of Lithuania Tomas Godliauskas in an interview with POLITICO.
Both the erstwhile and fresh NATO military mobility projects are based on the presumption that the Americans will come to the rescue. However, this conviction is increasingly challenged in relation to Washington’s attitude.
— I'm worried about that. I hope that we will not change our commitment importantly in Europe. It would be a terrible mistake for the United States,” he says in an interview with POLITICO Ben Hodges, erstwhile U.S. Army commander-in-chief on the continent.
"France and Germany will effort to fill this gap"
But what happens if America abandons Europe? The reality is that without US support, moving troops across Europe would be slower, more costly and hampered by the mosaic of bottlenecks. In a crisis, this can be not only ineffective but besides deadly dangerous.
European leaders for a long time debated strategical autonomy, but they did so under a strategy in which Washington continues to exercise care over basic military mobility tools — aircraft, ships, fuel lines, satellites, cybersecurity defence and interoperability standards that hold all of this together.
— There are crucial capabilities to which we are dependent on the US," said Kimberley Kruijver, a investigator from the Dutch consulting company TNO.
Europe lacks dense transport aircraft, military cargo ships and specialised vehicles required to decision tanks and armored units.
— We can carry lighter vehicles, but not heavier things,” said Kruijver.
Jannik Hartmann, a Think Tank worker of the German abroad Relations Council, confirmed that the withdrawal of the United States — for example from the German Ramstein Air Base — would leave Europe without basic loading equipment specified as ramps and carriages with platforms. Kruijver adds that Europe besides has fewer military equipment stores of its own, but those that the United States has deployed in Germany, Poland and the Netherlands.
The refuelling of aircraft in the air — essential to defend airspace — is inactive mostly the domain of the United States. The defence of the east flank of Europe is based on American-funded capabilities in this area. Hartmann stated that in the event of Washington's withdrawal, countries specified as France and Germany will effort to fill this gap.
Dependence on the US goes beyond logistics. Europe besides relies on American intelligence, cybersecurity defence and hybrid threat detection.
“If the United States withdraws, the intelligence and satellite designation capabilities will endure first,” said Simon Van Hoemimssen, a investigator from the Belgian think tank of the Royal Higher Defence Institute.
US cybersecurity capabilities play a key function in defending European military networks. Without them, the infrastructure of the continent would become an easy mark for cyber attacks, sabotage and disinformation campaigns. Hartmann noted that even with increased investment, Europe would have difficulty replacing these capacities in the short term.
One of the biggest challenges
Even if Europe was able to get its own assets, the challenge would be to decision troops, tanks and fuel across the continent.
Hodges calls European infrastructure "one of the biggest challenges" for military mobility.
— If you put Patriot rocket defence strategy launcher On the train car, will it fit in any tunnel? If they're in a convoy, can they safely drive under any bridge? Will bridges in east and confederate Europe withstand the weight of a 70-75-ton tank?
The answer is frequently “no”.
Sem van der Wal/HOLLANDSE HOOGTE/East News / East NewsPatriot strategy launcher (picture)
Sergei Boeke, a political advisor at the European Joint NATO Support and Facilitation Command, stated that the European rail network is not adapted to fast deployment of large-scale troops.
Weak bridges, sharp corners, narrow tunnels, and poorly placed signs make it hard to decision dense weapons rapidly by rail. The roads besides leave much to be desired. Unlike Cold War projects, most of today's infrastructure was never designed for military use.
In addition, coordination between allies weakens bureaucracy and deficiency of cooperation at logistical level. The only body likely to have a full image of military mobility in Europe is not in the glass towers of the NATO office in Brussels, based in Ulm, Germany. This is where the Joint Support Command — (Joint Support and Enabling Command, JSEC) works.
The task of JSEC is to supervise routes, transhipment points and to plan shipments within NATO, map key logistics hubs, plan emergency situations and monitor strategical corridors connecting key allies — from the Netherlands to Poland and Greece to Romania.
JSEC is under the authority of the ultimate Allied NATO Commander in Europe, which was always held by an American general. This means that Washington inactive has the authority over Europe's comprehensive efforts to accomplish coordinated mobility across the continent.
"Russian threat will only get worse
Moreover, according to Van Hoeymssen, coordination and exchange of information between the JSEC and the European Union remains inconsistent, mainly due to political tensions between associate States.
Coordination challenges can be addressed through military exercises between EU associate States, but there are concerns that the United States can reduce its participation in European exercises (except for those already scheduled for this year).
— If this is confirmed, it will be a crucial blow, as Hartmann warned.
JSEC commander General weapon Kai Rohrschneider said in an interview with POLITICO that his command is working with European countries to measure and improve the "minimum operational requirements" for the transport network.
This process includes identifying critical infrastructure and logistics nodes, knowing who serves them and encouraging countries to adopt a more flexible military mobility system.
Referring to Europe's efforts to gaining strategical independence, Rohrschneider stressed the continent's key function in strengthening military mobility.
— From a possible perspective, this is an effort that Europeans must make," he said, adding that "Europe is truly working very hard to accomplish this."
The EU strengthens its cooperation with JSEC. A fresh Communication on military mobility is expected in the second half of 2025. The EU focuses on bottlenecks in transport and bureaucracy. The subject of military mobility has already appeared in ReArm Europe Package and the EU White Paper on Defence.
Speaking to the European Parliament on 2 April, the EU Commissioner for Transport, Apostolos Tzitzikostas, announced that the European Commission was developing a fresh plan to improve the rules on dangerous goods, remove outdated weight restrictions and reduce bureaucracy.
"We have a list of about 500 military mobility projects," he said, citing the contributions of both national defence ministries and NATO.
"Short-term fast investments will strengthen road and rail bridges, widen tunnels, grow port infrastructure and let the location of railway sidings to increase capacity" he added.
The head of his cabinet, Anna Panagopoulou, besides signaled on 9 April that the EU is preparing a strategy to guarantee that ports on the continent will be able to meet the logistical demands of war.
Member States besides take the initiative and ask Brussels for additional funding.
“ Lithuania hopes to rise EU backing for the project, ” said Godliauskas in an interview with POLITICO.
However, all these plans are inactive based on an old model of building East-West infrastructure based on an alliance with the US. If Americans do not arrive with reinforcements in case of emergency, meticulous logistics may prove useless.
By investing crucial resources in a war strategy based on US support that may never materialize, Europe risks preparing for the incorrect conflict — 1 where ports and beaches will stay empty, while European factories building tanks and bases training soldiers will be cut off from the front. However, fewer experts — or political decision makers — seem willing to face this opportunity.
General Hodges says that if the Americans withdraw, “the threat from Russia will only worsen.”
“If the Russians find that the United States will retreat its commitment, the hazard of making a terrible decision will increase,” he explained.
Hodges added that this means that the problem of military mobility must be solved — whether the US remains active in Europe or not.
