Description
Has Trump’s confrontational stance toward European allies undermined NATO’s credibility? In this article, we introduce a theory of retrenchment signaling to explain the double-edged impact of the recent shifts in U.S. foreign policy on the perceptions of the strength of NATO’s collective defense commitments. On the one hand, the theory suggests that highly publicized, credible signals of great power retrenchment significantly decrease the general perceptions of the credibility of commitments made by that power toward its weaker allies (first-order effect). On the other hand, the fears of abandonment and deterrence failures create strong incentives for weaker allies to adopt postures credibly signaling increased resolve. This second-order effect of retrenchment signaling ultimately leads to an increased credibility of mutual commitments among the remaining alliance members. We test this theory through a series of repeated preregistered population surveys in the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Poland, Canada, and the Russian Federation, and an elite survey conducted in the British parliament. Results of our cross-national study demonstrate a dramatic decline in the credibility of the U.S. commitments to NATO during the first few months of Trump’s second administration. At the same time, we also show a systematic increase in the credibility of collective defense commitments provided by other NATO allies. Importantly, our study in the British parliament provides empirical support for the claim that European political elites are even more skeptical of the U.S. willingness to defend its allies than the general public. Our findings contribute to the current debates about the impact of Trump’s second-term foreign policy and to the existing scholarship about the impact of great power retrenchment on world politics.
