Trump’s NATO Shock: How A US Exit Threat Could Reshape Global Power And Boost India

Last Updated:April 02, 2026, 14:39 IST

The potential weakening of NATO comes at a time when the global order is already shifting towards multipolarity. A fractured alliance system would accelerate this trend

As countries look to diversify their suppliers, India could emerge as a cost-effective alternative in certain segments of the arms market. (AFP Photo)

Remarks by President Donald Trump suggesting he is “absolutely” considering pulling the US out of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have triggered alarm across global capitals.

“I’ll be discussing my disgust with NATO,” Trump said in an address to the nation. When asked if he was thinking about pulling out of NATO, he said, “Oh, absolutely without question. Wouldn’t you do that if you were me?”

The comments come amid rising tensions over the Iran conflict and frustration within Washington over what it sees as inadequate support from European allies. While threats to NATO are not new in Trump’s political rhetoric, the timing and intensity of this statement have raised concerns about a potential rupture in one of the world’s most important military alliances.

Markets have already begun reacting to this uncertainty. Defence stocks, including in India, have surged on expectations that geopolitical instability could drive higher military spending and demand for arms.

At stake is not just NATO’s future, but the structure of global security itself.

Why NATO Matters, And What A US Exit Would Mean

Since its formation in 1949, NATO has been the backbone of Western military cooperation. It binds together North American and European nations under a collective defence framework, where an attack on one is treated as an attack on all.

The US is the central pillar of this alliance. It provides the majority of NATO’s military capabilities, including nuclear deterrence, logistics, intelligence, and funding. Without Washington, NATO’s operational strength would be significantly weakened.

“NATO has been the cornerstone of Western security architecture since the end of the Second World War. If Trump pulls the US out of NATO, it would mark one of the most significant shifts in European and global security architecture. In that sense, a fracturing of the transatlantic relationship could be a pivotal moment, signalling the possible end of Western dominance in the global order,” said Harsh V Pant, Vice President, Observer Research Foundation (ORF), and Professor, King’s India Institute at King’s College London.

Pant further said it is “too early” to say whether Trump will pull the US out of NATO or follow through on his threat, as “this could also be a bargaining tactic he has used in the past”. He pointed out that Trump has previously pressured NATO members to increase their defence spending. “So, in many ways, the US-Europe security relationship is clearly undergoing a transformation.”

Why This Could Mean A Fragmented World Order

The potential weakening of NATO comes at a time when the global order is already shifting towards multipolarity. A fractured alliance system would accelerate this trend.

According to Chatham House, a renowned independent policy institute in the UK, a “useful” way to understand the emerging global order is through the idea of “multiplexity,” defined by three key features. First, no single country, or bloc, is likely to dominate. The US is expected to remain the most powerful player, particularly in military, financial, and technological terms. Moreover, China is set to lead in development and trade, even if it does not match the US financial influence. Meanwhile, the European Union will continue to shape global trade and climate rules.

Alongside these powers, regional players are likely to gain prominence. Countries such as Indonesia within ASEAN and South Africa within the African Union could play a greater role in managing political, security, and economic affairs. This shift will not be limited to BRICS nations; countries like Mexico, Nigeria, and Turkey are also likely to emerge as influential actors, reflecting a more distributed and interconnected global system.

Second, power and alignments in a multiplex world will be fluid and issue-specific. Countries are likely to avoid rigid alliances and instead adopt flexible strategies, balancing relationships based on their interests. As Malaysian analyst Elina Noor notes in the context of Southeast Asia, nations may align with one power on a particular issue while maintaining strong ties with another in different areas. For instance, a country may rely on China for economic and infrastructure support while turning to the US and its allies for security cooperation.

This growing tendency towards strategic flexibility suggests a shift away from traditional bloc politics. The idea of fixed spheres of influence is becoming less relevant as countries pursue more independent, interest-driven foreign policies.

Third, no single nation will dominate across all domains. The US may continue to lead in security alliances, China could remain central to global trade, and the European Union may shape climate policy. Meanwhile, countries in the Global South are likely to diversify their partnerships, seeking support in areas such as security, technology, and public health from a range of partners, including the UK, Germany, India, Turkey, South Africa, Brazil, and Saudi Arabia.

In doing so, these nations could gain greater agency in shaping their own development paths, choosing partners based on specific needs rather than fixed alignments.

Why This Could Open Doors For India

For India, this evolving landscape presents both opportunity and complexity. Unlike many countries, India has long practised strategic autonomy. It maintains relationships with several global powers, including the US, Europe, and Russia, without being formally tied to any military alliance. In a fragmented world, this positioning could become a significant advantage.

One of the most immediate opportunities lies in defence exports. As countries look to diversify their suppliers, India could emerge as a cost-effective alternative in certain segments of the arms market. The government’s push to expand defence exports under its domestic manufacturing initiatives may find new momentum.

There is also a broader industrial angle. Increased global demand for military equipment could boost India’s defence manufacturing ecosystem, encouraging investment, technology transfer, and capacity expansion.

At a diplomatic level, India could gain greater leverage. A weakening of traditional alliances may increase the importance of countries that can act as bridges between blocs. India, with its ties to both Western nations and the Global South, is well placed to play such a role.

What Could Be The Challenges?

India’s defence export capacity, while growing, remains relatively limited compared to established players like the US and European nations. There are also gaps in high-end technology, particularly in advanced weapons systems and defence electronics.

India’s defence export capacity has witnessed a rapid surge, reaching a record Rs 38,424 crore ($4.6 billion+) in FY 2025-26, growing over 62% from the previous year. Now exporting to over 100 countries, India’s portfolio includes major platforms such as the BrahMos missile, Dornier aircraft, artillery guns, and bulletproof vests, supported by both public (54.8%) and private (45.2%) sectors.

Moreover, geopolitical complexities could complicate India’s positioning. Its longstanding defence ties with Russia, for instance, have already created friction with Western partners in the past. Any attempt to expand exports into new markets would need to navigate these sensitivities.

Europe, too, may prioritise building its own defence capabilities rather than relying heavily on external suppliers. A push towards greater self-reliance within the European Union could limit the scale of opportunities available to countries like India.

How Serious Is The Threat Of A US Exit Fom NATO?

Historically, such a move would face significant legal and political hurdles. Withdrawal from NATO is not a simple executive decision and could require approval from the US Congress. There are also strong institutional and strategic incentives for the United States to remain engaged in the alliance.

That said, even the possibility of withdrawal is enough to create uncertainty. Allies may begin preparing for a future where US support is less reliable, leading to gradual shifts in defence planning and partnerships.

In geopolitics, perception often matters as much as action. The credibility of NATO has already been shaken, and rebuilding trust could take time.

What To Watch Next

The coming months will be critical in determining how this situation unfolds. The first indicator will be whether the rhetoric translates into policy. Any concrete steps by the US towards reducing its NATO commitments would have immediate global repercussions.

Equally important will be Europe’s response. Moves towards greater defence integration, increased military spending, or new partnerships could signal a long-term shift in the global security landscape.

For India, the focus will be on how quickly it can position itself to take advantage of emerging opportunities. This includes scaling up defence manufacturing, strengthening export capabilities, and navigating complex diplomatic terrain.

If NATO’s cohesion weakens, the world may not simply become more unstable, it may also become more open to new centres of influence.

“I’ll be discussing my disgust with NATO,” Trump said in an address to the nation. When asked if he was thinking about pulling out of NATO, he said, “Oh, absolutely without question. Wouldn’t you do that if you were me?”

The comments come amid rising tensions over the Iran conflict and frustration within Washington over what it sees as inadequate support from European allies. While threats to NATO are not new in Trump’s political rhetoric, the timing and intensity of this statement have raised concerns about a potential rupture in one of the world’s most important military alliances.

Markets have already begun reacting to this uncertainty. Defence stocks, including in India, have surged on expectations that geopolitical instability could drive higher military spending and demand for arms.

At stake is not just NATO’s future, but the structure of global security itself.

Why NATO Matters, And What A US Exit Would Mean

Since its formation in 1949, NATO has been the backbone of Western military cooperation. It binds together North American and European nations under a collective defence framework, where an attack on one is treated as an attack on all.

The US is the central pillar of this alliance. It provides the majority of NATO’s military capabilities, including nuclear deterrence, logistics, intelligence, and funding. Without Washington, NATO’s operational strength would be significantly weakened.

“NATO has been the cornerstone of Western security architecture since the end of the Second World War. If Trump pulls the US out of NATO, it would mark one of the most significant shifts in European and global security architecture. In that sense, a fracturing of the transatlantic relationship could be a pivotal moment, signalling the possible end of Western dominance in the global order,” said Harsh V Pant, Vice President, Observer Research Foundation (ORF), and Professor, King’s India Institute at King’s College London.

Pant further said it is “too early” to say whether Trump will pull the US out of NATO or follow through on his threat, as “this could also be a bargaining tactic he has used in the past”. He pointed out that Trump has previously pressured NATO members to increase their defence spending. “So, in many ways, the US-Europe security relationship is clearly undergoing a transformation.”

Why This Could Mean A Fragmented World Order

The potential weakening of NATO comes at a time when the global order is already shifting towards multipolarity. A fractured alliance system would accelerate this trend.

According to Chatham House, a renowned independent policy institute in the UK, a “useful” way to understand the emerging global order is through the idea of “multiplexity,” defined by three key features. First, no single country, or bloc, is likely to dominate. The US is expected to remain the most powerful player, particularly in military, financial, and technological terms. Moreover, China is set to lead in development and trade, even if it does not match the US financial influence. Meanwhile, the European Union will continue to shape global trade and climate rules.

Alongside these powers, regional players are likely to gain prominence. Countries such as Indonesia within ASEAN and South Africa within the African Union could play a greater role in managing political, security, and economic affairs. This shift will not be limited to BRICS nations; countries like Mexico, Nigeria, and Turkey are also likely to emerge as influential actors, reflecting a more distributed and interconnected global system.

Second, power and alignments in a multiplex world will be fluid and issue-specific. Countries are likely to avoid rigid alliances and instead adopt flexible strategies, balancing relationships based on their interests. As Malaysian analyst Elina Noor notes in the context of Southeast Asia, nations may align with one power on a particular issue while maintaining strong ties with another in different areas. For instance, a country may rely on China for economic and infrastructure support while turning to the US and its allies for security cooperation.

This growing tendency towards strategic flexibility suggests a shift away from traditional bloc politics. The idea of fixed spheres of influence is becoming less relevant as countries pursue more independent, interest-driven foreign policies.

Third, no single nation will dominate across all domains. The US may continue to lead in security alliances, China could remain central to global trade, and the European Union may shape climate policy. Meanwhile, countries in the Global South are likely to diversify their partnerships, seeking support in areas such as security, technology, and public health from a range of partners, including the UK, Germany, India, Turkey, South Africa, Brazil, and Saudi Arabia.

In doing so, these nations could gain greater agency in shaping their own development paths, choosing partners based on specific needs rather than fixed alignments.

Why This Could Open Doors For India

For India, this evolving landscape presents both opportunity and complexity. Unlike many countries, India has long practised strategic autonomy. It maintains relationships with several global powers, including the US, Europe, and Russia, without being formally tied to any military alliance. In a fragmented world, this positioning could become a significant advantage.

One of the most immediate opportunities lies in defence exports. As countries look to diversify their suppliers, India could emerge as a cost-effective alternative in certain segments of the arms market. The government’s push to expand defence exports under its domestic manufacturing initiatives may find new momentum.

There is also a broader industrial angle. Increased global demand for military equipment could boost India’s defence manufacturing ecosystem, encouraging investment, technology transfer, and capacity expansion.

At a diplomatic level, India could gain greater leverage. A weakening of traditional alliances may increase the importance of countries that can act as bridges between blocs. India, with its ties to both Western nations and the Global South, is well placed to play such a role.

What Could Be The Challenges?

India’s defence export capacity, while growing, remains relatively limited compared to established players like the US and European nations. There are also gaps in high-end technology, particularly in advanced weapons systems and defence electronics.

India’s defence export capacity has witnessed a rapid surge, reaching a record Rs 38,424 crore ($4.6 billion+) in FY 2025-26, growing over 62% from the previous year. Now exporting to over 100 countries, India’s portfolio includes major platforms such as the BrahMos missile, Dornier aircraft, artillery guns, and bulletproof vests, supported by both public (54.8%) and private (45.2%) sectors.

Moreover, geopolitical complexities could complicate India’s positioning. Its longstanding defence ties with Russia, for instance, have already created friction with Western partners in the past. Any attempt to expand exports into new markets would need to navigate these sensitivities.

Europe, too, may prioritise building its own defence capabilities rather than relying heavily on external suppliers. A push towards greater self-reliance within the European Union could limit the scale of opportunities available to countries like India.

How Serious Is The Threat Of A US Exit Fom NATO?

Historically, such a move would face significant legal and political hurdles. Withdrawal from NATO is not a simple executive decision and could require approval from the US Congress. There are also strong institutional and strategic incentives for the United States to remain engaged in the alliance.

That said, even the possibility of withdrawal is enough to create uncertainty. Allies may begin preparing for a future where US support is less reliable, leading to gradual shifts in defence planning and partnerships.

In geopolitics, perception often matters as much as action. The credibility of NATO has already been shaken, and rebuilding trust could take time.

What To Watch Next

The coming months will be critical in determining how this situation unfolds. The first indicator will be whether the rhetoric translates into policy. Any concrete steps by the US towards reducing its NATO commitments would have immediate global repercussions.

Equally important will be Europe’s response. Moves towards greater defence integration, increased military spending, or new partnerships could signal a long-term shift in the global security landscape.

For India, the focus will be on how quickly it can position itself to take advantage of emerging opportunities. This includes scaling up defence manufacturing, strengthening export capabilities, and navigating complex diplomatic terrain.

If NATO’s cohesion weakens, the world may not simply become more unstable, it may also become more open to new centres of influence.

Stay Ahead, Read Faster

Scan the QR code to download the News18 app and enjoy a seamless news experience anytime, anywhere.

login