“自强论”在欧洲崛起：没有美国的北约，需要付出多少代价？

当地时间11月22日，美国当选总统特朗普与北约新任秘书长吕特在美国佛罗里达州棕榈滩会面，两人微笑握手的照片成为焦点。然而，在欧洲的国防部门内部，却弥漫着一种阴郁的情绪。在美国大选后的几天里，欧洲国家的国防官员和防务产业高管齐聚布拉格的会议上，最乐观的评价是竟是：特朗普“不可预测”，其他评价可见有多悲观。

据报道，随着特朗普第二任期即将开始，欧洲的安全危机比以往任何时候都更加严重，“自强论”在欧洲逐渐崛起。

欧洲主要的担忧是，特朗普偏向单边行动，并将政策重点重新转向其他地方，可能导致华盛顿减少对盟国的承诺，特别在欧洲面临潜在俄乌冲突威胁扩大的情况下。

有观点认为，美国候任总统特朗普如果决定退出北约，那这个组织将形同“纸老虎”。

意大利政治学者安德烈亚·洛卡泰利称，批评者警告，北大西洋公约组织（NATO）——历史上最持久的军事联盟，可能终结。一位欧洲高级安全官员承认：“无论如何，欧洲人将不得不承担更多的（国防）负担，问题是这将是一个受管理的过程，还是一个混乱的过程。”报道指出，如果美国突然减少其在欧洲的安全存在，北约将面临三个广泛的问题：该做什么？先做什么？以及这需要付出什么代价？

能独立吗？

北约“新部队模式”难摆脱美国依赖

从纸面上看，北约军事联盟的准备从未如此充分。自2022年2月俄乌冲突爆发以来，东欧部署了更多部队，商定了非常详细的军事计划，并签署了北约所谓的“新部队模式”——需要在不到10天内部署超过10万军队，这比北约2022年前的计划人数多两倍、时间快5天。不过，如果没有美国的军事能力和领导力，欧洲是否能够做到这一点？

“现在波罗的海国家和波兰对自身安全的担忧比以往更为强烈，我认为其他人都明白这一点。”另一位欧洲高级官员表示，“现在是（欧洲北约）领导人坐下来思考他们需要做什么的时候了。这会很难吗？……哦，是的，这将非常非常困难。”

英国传统上是北约中仅次于美国的重要角色，但英国国防大臣希利表示，其军队已被“掏空”。法国拥有北约中第二重要的武装力量，但其军事储备薄弱。至于德国，这个潜在的大陆最大军费支出国，其军事现代化因宪法支出限制而受阻。

国际战略研究所（IISS）国防与军事分析负责人詹姆斯·哈克特最近指出，随着欧洲国家努力实现“新北约部队模型”的目标，稳定性将在这些努力中发挥核心作用，“政策的持续关注、合同的持续履行以及资金的持续投入，都是激发国防工业信心的必要条件。”

分析师斯特林格说：“这就是‘乏味的战争’。像弹药储备、运输和后勤这样的东西，它们才真正重要，但几乎没有欧洲国家能做到规模化处理这些事务，除了美国。美国的军事霸权领导力拉动了欧洲国家。”

图为北约军演（资料图）

能统一吗？

援乌炮弹型号引发系列问题

有分析称，首先，现今欧洲分散化的防务产业需要重新整合。根据麦肯锡的数据，在战斗机、坦克和驱逐舰等11类主要武器系统中，美国有32种版本，而欧洲有172种版本。又例如，得到欧洲援助的乌克兰军队需要处理超过12种不同类型的155毫米炮弹，并且经常需要根据不同的版本调整火炮。

“欧洲防务产业的重组迫在眉睫，平台种类太多了。”意大利工业巨头Fincantieri的首席执行官皮耶罗贝托·福尔吉耶罗表示，这种分散的武器体系不仅拉高了成本，还限制了各国之间的互操作性。

其次，避免欧洲成员国间的分裂并促进团结也非常重要。有预测认为，如果美国退出北约，谁将担任北约最高指挥官这一职务，可能会引发激烈争议。这一职务一直以来都是由美国人担任。

在最近的一些指挥决策上，欧盟成员国之间甚至已经出现了摩擦。最近欧盟各首都正在就第三国防务承包商（如英国、挪威或土耳其的企业）是否可以参与拟议的联合采购协议或共享平台进行谈判。法国主张第三国防务企业可以获得约三分之一的国防采购基金，而这一立场与其他欧盟成员国的意见不一致。

能走多远？

欧洲防务如何破解资金与装备难题

实现欧盟成员国增加国防开支的目标也是一大挑战。根据北约的数据，欧洲盟国自2022年以来将国防预算增加了近三分之一，达到了4760亿美元。截至今年6月，北约32个成员国中已有23个国家实现了将国内生产总值（GDP）2%用于国防的目标。

然而，其他成员国是否能够实现这一目标仍不确定。由于许多欧洲成员国面临较高的公共债务，预算也较为紧张，医疗和教育预算往往优先考虑，是否能够按时达到国防开支目标仍是一个悬而未决的问题。

即使所有成员国都达标，但就如北约秘书长马克·吕特所说，仅靠2%的目标“还远远不够”，“我们在防务上投入越多，未来发生冲突的风险就越小”。

北约秘书长马克·吕特直言欧洲需要在防务上投入越多

当地时间11月25日，北约军事委员会主席罗布·鲍尔表示，实施北约新防御计划需要北约盟国的国防开支更接近其国内生产总值（GDP）的3%，而不是2%。国际战略研究所的国防经济高级研究员费内拉·麦克格蒂对此表示，这一增长水平非常迅速，并且明显表明欧洲战略环境正在恶化，全球军备竞赛进一步加剧，引人担忧。

另据分析称，想要完全取代美国，要付出的军事资金代价相当于欧盟GDP的约0.3%。最近领导英国国防部一支负责评估英国军事实力的单位的牛津大学学者罗布·约翰逊说，英国和欧洲“负担得起”，尽管“这将是一个特别困难的决定，因为大部分设备将不得不从美国购买”。

也有观点认为，最终没有美国的北约将难以应对安全危机。美国提供给北约的许多军需物资是无法替代的。有分析指出：“资金是政治问题，可以解决，但美国拥有的这些军事装备是无法替代的，这才是关键问题。”

翻译:

On November 22, local time, US President-elect Donald Trump and the new secretary general of NATO Rutte met in Palm Beach, Florida, the United States, and the photo of the two men smiling and shaking hands became the focus. within Europe's defence establishment, however, there is a somber mood. When European defence officials and industry executives gathered in Prague in the days after the US election, the most optimistic assessment was that Mr Trump was "unpredictable", while other assessments showed how pessimistic.

According to reports, as Trump's second term is about to begin, the security crisis in Europe is more serious than ever, and the "self-strengthening theory" is gradually rising in Europe.

The main concern in Europe is that Trump's preference for unilateral action and refocusing policy elsewhere could lead Washington to reduce its commitment to Allies, especially as Europe faces a widening threat of a potential conflict with Ukraine.

Some people believe that if US President-elect Donald Trump decides to withdraw from NATO, the organization will become a "paper tiger."

Andrea Locatelli, an Italian political scientist, says critics are warning that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the most enduring military alliance in history, could be over. "One way or another, the Europeans are going to have to shoulder more of the [defence] burden and the question is whether it's going to be a managed process or a messy process," admits a senior European security official. If the United States suddenly reduced its security presence in Europe, NATO would face three broad questions: What to do? What do you do first? And what will it take?

Can you be independent?

NATO's "new force model" cannot get rid of the dependence of the United States

On paper, the NATO military alliance has never been better prepared. Since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in February 2022, more troops have been deployed in Eastern Europe, very detailed military plans have been agreed, and what NATO calls a "new force model" has been signed - more than 100,000 troops need to be deployed in less than 10 days, which is twice as many as NATO planned by 2022 and five days faster. But can Europe do this without US military capability and leadership?

"Now the Baltic states and Poland are more worried about their security than ever before, and I think everyone else understands that." Another senior European official said, "It's time for [European NATO] leaders to sit down and think about what they need to do." Is it going to be hard? ... Oh yes, it's going to be very, very difficult."

Britain has traditionally been an important player in NATO after the United States, but British Defense Secretary Healey said its military had been "hollowed out." France has the second most important armed forces in NATO, but its military reserves are weak. As for Germany, potentially the continent's largest military spender, its military modernization is hampered by constitutional spending limits.

James Hackett, head of defense and military analysis at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), recently noted that as European countries work to achieve the goals of the "new NATO Force model," stability will play a central role in these efforts, and that "sustained policy attention, continued contract fulfillment, and continued funding are all necessary to inspire confidence in the defense industry."

Analyst Stringer said: "This is the 'boring war'. Things like ammunition stockpiling, transportation and logistics, they are really important, but few European countries can handle these things at scale, except the United States. The hegemonic military leadership of the United States has drawn European countries along.

Photo shows NATO military exercise (file photo)

Can it be unified?

The type of ammunition used to aid Ukraine caused a series of problems

First, Europe's fragmented defense industry needs to be reintegrated. according to McKinsey, the US has 32 versions of 11 major weapon systems, such as fighter jets, tanks and destroyers, while Europe has 172. For example, the Ukrainian army, which received European assistance, had to deal with more than a dozen different types of 155mm shells and often had to adjust its artillery to different versions.

"There is an urgent need to restructure the European defence industry. There are too many platforms." Pieroberto Forgiero, CEO of Italian industrial giant Fincantieri, said the decentralized weapons system not only pushes up costs, but also limits interoperability between countries.

Second, it is important to avoid fragmentation among European member states and to promote solidarity. If the United States withdraws from NATO, it is expected that there will be a fierce dispute over who will take the post of Supreme commander of NATO. The job has always been held by an American.

There has even been friction among EU member states over some recent command decisions. There have been ongoing talks in EU capitals over whether third-country defence contractors, such as those from the UK, Norway or Turkey, can participate in proposed joint procurement agreements or shared platforms. France has argued that third-country defence companies should receive about a third of defence procurement funds, a position at odds with other EU member states.

How far can it go?

How to solve the funding and equipment conundrum for European defense

Meeting the EU member states' target of increasing defence spending is also a challenge. According to NATO, European Allies have increased their defense budgets by nearly a third since 2022, to $476 billion. As of June, 23 of NATO's 32 members had met the target of spending 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense.

However, it remains uncertain whether other member states will be able to meet this target. With many European member states facing high public debt and tight budgets, where health and education budgets tend to take priority, it remains an open question whether defense spending targets will be met on time.

Even if all members meet the target, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has said that the 2% target is "far from enough" and that "the more we invest in defense, the less risk there will be of future conflict."

Mark Rutte, NATO's secretary general, is blunt about the more Europe needs to spend on defense

Rob Power, chairman of the NATO Military Committee, said on Tuesday that implementing NATO's new defense plan would require NATO Allies to spend more on defense at 3 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) than 2 percent. Fenella McGerty, senior fellow for defense economics at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said the level of growth is very rapid and clearly indicates that the European strategic environment is deteriorating and the global arms race is further intensifying, which is worrying.

According to the analysis, to completely replace the United States, the cost of military funding is equivalent to about 0.3% of the EU's GDP. Rob Johnson, an Oxford University academic who recently led a Ministry of Defence unit charged with assessing Britain's military capabilities, said the UK and Europe "can afford it", although "it will be a particularly difficult decision as much of the equipment will have to be bought from the US".

Some argue that NATO will not be able to cope with security crises without the United States. Much of the military supplies the United States provides to NATO cannot be replaced. "Money is a political problem that can be solved, but the key issue is that the U.S. has military equipment that cannot be replaced," said an analyst.

句子分析：

1.

句子成分分析：

[For example], the Ukrainian army, (which received European assistance), had to deal with [more than] a dozen different types (of 155mm shells) and often had to adjust its artillery to different versions.

句子语法结构详解：

* which 为关系代词，引导非限制性定语从句。
* received 为谓语，采用一般过去时。
* deal 为谓语。
* adjust 为谓语。
* its 为物主代词。had to 为情态动词。the 为定冠词。a 为不定冠词。

句子相关词汇解释：

Phrase:

Vocabulary:

2.

句子成分分析：

Pieroberto Forgiero, <CEO (of Italian industrial giant Fincantieri)>, said | the decentralized weapons system not only pushes up costs, but also limits interoperability [between countries].

句子语法结构详解：

(said 为 say 的过去式。)

* CEO of Italian industrial giant Fincantieri 为同位语
* said 为谓语，采用一般过去时。
* the 开头为宾语从句，引导词 that 被省略。
* decentralized 为过去分词作定语
* 句中含有 not only...but also... 并列结构，意为“不但……而且……”。
* pushes 为谓语，采用一般现在时。动词采用第三人称单数形式。
* limits 为谓语，采用一般现在时。动词采用第三人称单数形式。
* the 为定冠词。

句子相关词汇解释：

Phrase:

Vocabulary:

3.

句子成分分析：

There have been ongoing talks [in EU capitals] [over {whether third-country defence contractors, <such as those (from the UK, Norway or Turkey)>, can participate in proposed joint procurement agreements or shared platforms}].

句子语法结构详解：

* there 引导 there be ... 句型, 表示“有”的意思。
* been 为系动词作谓语，采用现在完成时。
* whether 为连词，引导宾语从句。
* participate 为谓语。
* proposed 为过去分词作定语
* shared 为过去分词作定语
* can 为情态动词。those 为指示代词。have 为助动词。the 为定冠词。

句子相关词汇解释：

Phrase:

Vocabulary:

4.

句子成分分析：

[With many European member states facing high public debt and tight budgets, (where health and education budgets tend to take priority)], it remains an open question (whether defense spending targets will be met [on time]).

句子语法结构详解：

(met 为 meet 的过去分词。)

* facing 为现在分词，构成“with + n. + 现在分词”复合宾语结构。
* where 为关系副词，引导非限制性定语从句。
* tend 为谓语，采用一般现在时。
* to take 为不定式，作状语。
* remains 为系动词作谓语，采用一般现在时。动词采用第三人称单数形式。
* question 为名词作表语。
* whether 为连词，引导同位语从句。
* met 为谓语，采用一般将来时和被动语态。
* will 为情态动词。be 为助动词。an 为不定冠词。

句子相关词汇解释：

Phrase:

Vocabulary:

以上是秒词邦为您整理编写的文章《“自强论”在欧洲崛起：没有美国的北约，需要付出多少代价？》的全部内容。秒词邦是国内权威分题型分考点背诵中高考/四六级考研/专升本/出国单词的专业单词软件。扫描如下小程序码，进入秒词邦官方小程序获取更多英语相关资料！ 【关键词：高考单词；高考英语；高中单词；高中英语；单词app；单词软件；记单词app；记单词软件；背单词软件；背单词app；英语单词；四六级单词；四六级英语；四六级单词app；四六级单词软件；考研单词app；考研单词软件；核心单词；高考冲刺复习；高考英语教材；高考英语真题；四六级真题；四六级试题；考研真题；考研英语单词；考研英语真题】