US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced a six-month Pentagon review of American forces in Europe on June 18, 2026, speaking at NATO headquarters in Brussels and calling for a fundamental reboot of the alliance into what he termed “NATO 3.0.” Hegseth lambasted European allies for failing to provide US forces access to their bases during the Iran conflict, calling it “shameful,” and said Europe must take primary responsibility for its own conventional defense. The announcement follows a period of intense US military activity: Ukraine launched its largest-ever drone attack on Moscow the same day, and the US and Iran signed a peace memorandum at Versailles, creating a geopolitical inflection point that Hegseth appeared to be using as justification for a structural NATO reset.
According to NPR, the review is designed to ensure NATO is moving “fast and irreversibly” toward Europe leading and taking primary responsibility for the defense of its own continent. The announcement came just two weeks after the US signaled it would withdraw an aircraft carrier, support ships, aerial refueling planes, and dozens of fighter jets from European crisis-response planning.
What NATO 3.0 Means
Hegseth defined NATO 3.0 as a “post-Cold War recognition that NATO needs to go back to a real hard-line military alliance that has real military capabilities capable of deterring right here on the continent and taking the lead for the conventional defense of Europe.” The framing deliberately evokes a return to fundamentals while redefining who is responsible for executing those fundamentals.
NATO 1.0 was the founding Cold War alliance formed in 1949 to deter Soviet expansion. NATO 2.0 was the post-Cold War expansion and humanitarian intervention era of the 1990s and 2000s, which added member states across Eastern Europe and conducted operations in the Balkans, Afghanistan, and Libya. Hegseth’s NATO 3.0 would reverse the underlying assumption that US military power is the core backstop of European security.
The Iran Bases Dispute
Hegseth’s sharpest rhetoric was directed at specific European allies who refused to allow US military forces to use their bases to launch strikes against Iran. He called this refusal “shameful” and cited it as evidence that European allies are not reliable partners in operations outside the NATO treaty area. The US Apache helicopter downed near the Strait of Hormuz and the air campaign against Iranian nuclear facilities were conducted from carriers and regional bases, not European NATO soil, in part because of this refusal.
The European refusal to support the Iran campaign reflects a fundamental strategic divergence: many European NATO members did not agree that military action against Iran was justified or wise, and they were unwilling to provide basing access for an operation they opposed. Hegseth’s framing treats this as a failure of alliance solidarity rather than a legitimate exercise of national sovereignty by sovereign states.
The Six-Month Review
The review will assess US military posture in Europe including troop levels, basing arrangements, equipment prepositioning, and command structures. The signal to European allies is clear: US force presence in Europe is no longer unconditional. Countries that invest more in their own defense and cooperate more fully with US operations can expect continued US commitment; those that do not may see US assets reduced. This creates particularly acute pressure on Germany, France, and Italy, which have historically relied heavily on US military guarantees while spending below NATO’s 2 percent of GDP defense target. The war in Ukraine has already forced European defense spending higher, but Hegseth’s message is that the pace is not fast enough.
European Reaction
European NATO members reacted with a mixture of concern and defiance. Several allies pointed out that Europe has dramatically increased defense spending since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine and that the US review contradicts the military cooperation needs created by the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict. NATO’s supreme allied commander acknowledged that backup plans for European defense without full US support were being developed, validating that the threat of US retrenchment is being taken seriously at the operational level.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is NATO 3.0?
NATO 3.0 is a term coined by US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on June 18, 2026 to describe his vision for a reformed NATO alliance in which Europe takes primary responsibility for its own conventional defense rather than relying on US military power as the core backstop. Hegseth announced a six-month Pentagon review of US forces in Europe as part of the shift toward NATO 3.0.
Why is Hegseth reviewing US troops in Europe?
Hegseth cited two main reasons: European allies refused to provide US forces access to bases during the Iran conflict (which he called “shameful”), and he believes European nations have not invested enough in their own military capabilities despite years of US pressure to reach the NATO 2 percent of GDP defense spending target. The six-month review will determine which US military assets remain in Europe and under what conditions.
Will the US withdraw troops from Europe?
The six-month review announced June 18, 2026 will assess US military posture in Europe but has not yet resulted in specific withdrawal decisions. The US had already signaled it would withdraw an aircraft carrier, aerial refueling planes, and dozens of fighter jets from European crisis-response planning as of early June 2026. Further reductions are contingent on the review’s findings and European allies’ response to the NATO 3.0 framework.
Related Articles
Trust Post Desk
A journalist and editor at TrustPost.org covering world and national news, technology updates and human-interest stories. They check every fact, interview sources in person or online, and aim to deliver clear, accurate reporting. Their work ranges from breaking news to in-depth features and daily newsletters. Outside the newsroom, they follow emerging trends and engage with readers on social media.
