The Trump administration is limiting an upcoming Poland meeting on NATO’s future to a smaller group of allies including Germany, Poland and several Nordic countries, leaving Britain, France and the Baltic states outside the talks as Washington pushes Europe to shoulder more of its own defense.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
The Trump administration is leaving several prominent NATO allies — including the United Kingdom, France and the Baltic states — out of an upcoming U.S.-led meeting in Poland focused on the alliance’s future, according to diplomats familiar with the planning.
The gathering is being spearheaded by Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby and will use the smaller “Bergen Group” format, which previously brought together the United States with Norway, Sweden, Finland, Poland, Germany and the Netherlands. Six diplomats familiar with the plans told Politico that Britain, France, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were not among those invited.
The decision has puzzled some European officials because several of the excluded countries are major military contributors or occupy strategically important positions on NATO’s eastern flank. “We’re doing everything that is being asked of us,” an official from one excluded country told Politico. “We’re trying to understand what the criteria is and what the purpose of these meetings are.”
The White House did not respond to Politico’s request for comment, while the Pentagon declined to discuss the meeting. Officials from countries participating in the smaller format have pushed back on suggestions that the Bergen Group is intended to create competing tiers within NATO, saying its purpose is to develop proposals that can later be tested and considered by the full 32-member alliance.
Colby has described the countries involved as allies that are rapidly meeting their defense-spending commitments, have sufficient military scale to make meaningful contributions and are prepared to move from discussion to practical action. After the first Bergen meeting in June, he said the participants were “NATO allies that are rapidly meeting their Hague spending commitments, have the scale to contribute, and are ready to get down to practical business.”
He later said the objective is “to pull the whole alliance along,” arguing that the process can ultimately create “a better and stronger NATO that is more durable” while increasing Europe’s capacity to defend itself.
That approach fits the broader Trump administration effort to rebalance military responsibilities between Washington and its European allies. President Donald Trump has repeatedly pressed NATO governments to spend more on defense and rely less heavily on American forces and taxpayers.
At the 2025 Hague summit, NATO members agreed to raise defense and security-related investment to 5% of gross domestic product annually by 2035. At least 3.5% is intended for core military requirements, while as much as another 1.5% can be devoted to areas such as critical infrastructure, cybersecurity, civil preparedness and the defense industrial base.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said in September that European allies and Canada are now moving toward matching U.S. defense spending and credited Trump with accelerating that change. “I know he pushes hard on defence spending, but ultimately, he’s right,” Rutte said. “We needed this shot of adrenaline.”
War Secretary Pete Hegseth has framed the transformation as “NATO 3.0,” with European countries taking greater responsibility for conventional defense while the alliance increases weapons production and strengthens its industrial base. During a September meeting with German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, Hegseth praised Germany for moving toward the higher spending commitment and said Berlin had been “front and center” in assuming more responsibility for European security.
The smaller Bergen Group appears to be one mechanism for advancing that agenda more quickly. Its membership, however, is drawing questions because Britain and France possess two of Europe’s most capable militaries and independent nuclear arsenals, while Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania sit directly on NATO’s eastern frontier with Russia and have made defense spending a major national priority.
One diplomat involved in the discussions said the smaller format could serve as “an engine for transformation” rather than a replacement for NATO-wide decision-making. Another European diplomat was more skeptical, warning against dividing members into preferred and less-preferred groups.
“If they try splitting NATO into the good ones and the bad ones, it is dangerous for the U.S.,” the diplomat said. “But for Europe, this is existential.”
The dispute comes as Washington is separately reviewing the U.S. military footprint in Europe and urging allies to assume greater responsibility for conventional deterrence. That review and the Bergen Group meetings do not alter NATO’s Article 5 collective-defense commitment, but they reflect the administration’s effort to change how the alliance distributes military spending, production and operational responsibility.
For now, the Poland meeting remains a consultation among a selected group rather than a formal NATO decision-making body. Its significance will depend largely on whether proposals developed by the participating countries are ultimately brought to the entire alliance — or whether the smaller format becomes a more permanent inner circle for shaping NATO’s future.
Original article
Comments