{"id":2912,"date":"2025-04-20T10:01:00","date_gmt":"2025-04-20T08:01:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/?p=2912"},"modified":"2025-04-09T12:22:40","modified_gmt":"2025-04-09T10:22:40","slug":"us-after-nato-3-foreign-policy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/","title":{"rendered":"The US after NATO - 3 - Foreign Policy"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><em>A US after NATO was unthinkable 3 months ago. Ceteris paribus it will erode the US superpower status<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Trump has eroded NATOs \"musketeer-oath\" ...<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>During his first presidency, Trump was very clear in his foreign and security policy stance that he wanted the U.S. to withdraw from NATO. During the 2024 campaign, he repeatedly questioned the U.S.'s commitment to NATO\u2019s core Article 5\u2014the Musketeer Oath\u2014stating that he would <a href=\"https:\/\/edition.cnn.com\/2024\/02\/10\/politics\/trump-russia-nato\/index.html\">\u201c\u2026 encourage Russia to do whatever the hell they want\u201d over for et hvilket som helst NATO medlemsland, \u201c\u2026 that doesn\u2019t pay enough\u201d<\/a>. He later adjusted this stance, arguing that the current 2% spending threshold was insufficient, saying, \u201c\u2026and perhaps not even 5% of GDP\u201d would be enough. Whether a country met the requirement, he added, would depend on whether its weapons systems were of sufficiently high quality\u2014by which he likely meant American-made.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Trump\u2019s push against NATO has paradoxically strengthened domestic unity in the U.S., despite challenging its most loyal allies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In 2024, a Gallup poll showed that 67% of Americans wanted to remain in NATO or even increase U.S. support, while 16% favored reducing its role, and only 12% supported a complete withdrawal.\u00a0<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>However, by early March, following the unusual Oval Office press conference with Zelensky, support for NATO had dropped to around 50%, with a clear majority of MAGA supporters favoring withdrawal.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">\u2026 and thus its value has effectively ceased to exist ...<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>But even if Trump wants to leave NATO entirely, the decision legally rests with Congress. A full withdrawal would require a two-thirds majority in the Senate, where Republicans hold \u201conly\u201d 53 out of 100 seats. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>However, the U.S. could effectively leave NATO by assuming only a logistical role, closing most of its bases in Europe, and recalling troops. So far, however, the U.S. has not reached that point. In fact, it is currently seeking to increase its military presence in countries such as Denmark.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped wp-block-gallery-1 is-layout-flex wp-block-gallery-is-layout-flex\">\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img fetchpriority=\"high\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"987\" data-id=\"2914\" src=\"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/EU-US-forces-location-1024x987.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2914\" srcset=\"\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" data-srcset=\"\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">... although the US' geopolitical interest herein is very questionablen ...<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>It is also crucial to note that it is Trump, not the U.S. military, that wants to leave NATO.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In December 1998, Jacques Chirac and Tony Blair agreed on the St. Malo Declaration, which aimed to establish a European pillar within NATO.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The initiative was largely shot down by the U.S., with then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright arguing that it conflicted with U.S. geopolitical interests.\u00a0<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Former U.S. NATO Commander (2009\u20132013) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bloomberg.com\/opinion\/articles\/2025-03-05\/europe-is-getting-ready-for-the-end-of-nato?utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&amp;utm_source=twitter&amp;cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_content=business&amp;embedded-checkout=true\">James Stavridis warned in early March that a U.S. withdrawal from NATO would be \u201ca mistake of epic proportions\u201d<\/a>It was Stravridis' assessment that Europe as a result would be far less likely to support the U.S. in global foreign and security policy.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>At its core, the U.S. risks its superpower status by breaking deeply with NATO. However, some of its credibility remains if Europeans develop their own military capacity to stand on their own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Maintaining the world\u2019s leading military is <a href=\"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/brics-versus-usd-2\/\">essential for securing supply lines and upholding the U.S. dollar as the world\u2019s primary reserve currency<\/a>, cf above.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>However, remaining the world\u2019s leading military force requires technological superiority, which in turn demands enormous investments in research and development. That, in turn, requires economies of scale\u2014best financed through arms exports. If the EU falls under Russian influence or builds sufficient strategic autonomy in its defense industry, the U.S.\u2019s ability to fund its technological edge diminishes, thereby challenging its military dominance.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">... including in other alliances<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Additionally, the U.S. would lose general trust among allies such as Quad partners India, Australia, and Japan if it definitively breaks its NATO commitments. Why should these nations trust the U.S. to keep its word to them?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Similarly, why should the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the UK, continue sharing their most critical intelligence with the U.S. if they cannot trust its commitments?<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The U.S.'s military strength, both in combat power and, more importantly, intelligence, diminishes when trust among its allies erodes over time.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Ultimately, superpower status is a function of how much trust third-party nations place in the U.S. Among European nations, trust in the U.S. is currently very low. In Germany, for example, an ARD poll found that only 16% of Germans believe Europe can rely on the U.S. This lack of confidence is reflected in Friedrich Merz's current rhetoric.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Politically it has led to lack of trust between the U.S. and EU ...<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The distrust also extends to political circles. When von der Leyen, Costa, and Kallas recently debriefed NATO countries that are not EU members, only one country was not invited: the U.S.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This deep concern stems from widespread dependence on the U.S. In Canada, for example, there is an open parliamentary debate about canceling its order for 88 U.S.-made F-35 fighter jets. The U.S. supplies the spare parts, and only the U.S. can update the jets\u2019 software.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The same concern exists worldwide\u2014and it could turn against U.S. interests. Why should African or Asian countries trust the U.S. when their trade volumes with the U.S. are far smaller than with the EU?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">... and without alliance partners it is difficult to remain a superpower<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The U.S. loses superpower status when it becomes too transactional or changes course too frequently.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Trust in international politics is built on consistency\u2014the ability to count on agreements and predict future actions. This is precisely where the U.S. will face growing difficulties. Trump struggles to maintain focus.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A 2021 meeting in Alaska between U.S. and Chinese diplomats led to a rare public confrontation, where Antony Blinken accused China of \u201cthreatening the rules-based order.\u201d\u00a0<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Four years later, China is now accusing the U.S. of the same\u2014fueling deeper skepticism toward the U.S. in many developing nations.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Distrust has also increased due to cuts to USAID\u2019s budget. Closing off aid to developing nations is equivalent to shutting down U.S. influence in the very countries that supply it with critical raw materials and minerals.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Russia and China (via the Belt and Road Initiative) have eagerly capitalized on these cutbacks, gaining unprecedented momentum in Africa and South America.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Thus, Trump risks inadvertently <a href=\"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/brics-versus-usd-2\/\">strengthening BRICS cooperation<\/a>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>U.S. superpower status is also under pressure in Asia. At the China Conference in February, Malaysia\u2019s Prime Minister Anwar bin Ibrahim\u2014ASEAN\u2019s acting chair\u2014declared, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scmp.com\/week-asia\/politics\/article\/3298935\/aseans-moment-now-malaysias-anwar-how-china-ties-bloc-must-evolve?utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=cm&amp;utm_campaign=enlz-breaking_news&amp;utm_content=20250217&amp;UUID=f4f94f80cd39e92e7c9b2f2552d30870&amp;tc=2\">\u201cAsean\u2019s moment is now\u201d, in response to U.S. AI policies and the prospect of a tariff war.<\/a>. Ibrahim particularly addressed \u201ceconomic coercion and unilateral actions\u201d\u2014arguing that ASEAN should focus on AI and the digital economy while securing strategic autonomy in energy and data (AI).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Thus, China and Russia gain most from the U.S.' de-coupling<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>As a result, China\u2014and to a lesser extent, Russia\u2014are the short-term winners of Trump\u2019s dismantling of U.S. global relations. Trump is currently sending conciliatory signals to Russia but likely has no interest in closer cooperation with China.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The America First Investment Policy (AFIP) is the core of Trump\u2019s trade wars, based on the principle that \u201ceconomic security is national security\u201d. AFIP primarily aims to distance the U.S. from everything Chinese.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This aligns with the theory that the U.S. is currently pursuing a \u201cReverse Kissinger\u201d strategy\u2014attempting to shift Russia\u2019s allegiance away from China and toward the U.S. to isolate Beijing. This theory was confirmed by JD Vance and Pete Hegseth in late February.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The theory refers to Henry Kissinger\u2019s diplomatic d\u00e9tente with China in the early 1970s, which successfully isolated the Soviet Union.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>However, the China-Russia relationship today is far less strained than it was in the 1970s. That said, China still has significant geopolitical interests in <a href=\"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/chinas-and-russias-friendship-without-limits\/\">reclaiming Outer Manchuria\u2014the territory now known as Eastern Siberia, including Khabarovsk and Vladivostok<\/a>Yet, the Reverse Kissinger theory has an inherent flaw: Russia knows all too well how frequently U.S. global policies can change every four years. Geopolitically, Russia is opportunistic\u2014but it is also fundamentally pragmatic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped wp-block-gallery-2 is-layout-flex wp-block-gallery-is-layout-flex\">\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img decoding=\"async\" width=\"820\" height=\"526\" data-id=\"2916\" src=\"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-NATO.jpg\" alt=\"The U.S. after NATO\" class=\"wp-image-2916\" srcset=\"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-NATO.jpg 820w, https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-NATO-300x192.jpg 300w, https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-NATO-768x493.jpg 768w, https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-NATO-18x12.jpg 18w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 820px) 100vw, 820px\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">All in all, Trumps change agenda is urgent<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>In summary, Trump's change agenda is urgent. The economy has vulnerabilities that are exacerbated by his economic policies, and the U.S. depends both on increased foreign investment and rising tariff revenues. Therefore, Trump needs to demonstrate to U.S. allies and the world that it is America that calls the shots. It is unlikely that the U.S.\u2019s well-considered goal is to withdraw from NATO\u2014rather, it is a means to free up resources that can be focused elsewhere, most likely against China.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>However, in a massive restructuring of a country (or a corporation) like the one Trump has embarked on, one fundamental premise remains: consistency. Cultures and structures are built on trust between individuals. Trust is built over time, and it crumbles if communication and initiatives are not followed through or sustained until they take effect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Herein lies perhaps the greatest risk posed by Trump and Vance: while the economy may survive four chaotic years, global trust in the U.S. is at stake. Unlike during Trump's first presidency, this time there are alternatives to the U.S., such as China and BRICS+, which can assume parts of America's superpower status. They can do so particularly because the U.S. has decoupled from its traditional allies\u2014the EU, Canada, and Mexico. \nPower is a function of how others perceive you. If America's alliances crumble, the U.S. appears weaker. That perception alone can empower its alternatives.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Et USA efter NATO var udenrigspolitisk ut\u00e6nkeligt for 3 m\u00e5neder siden. Alt andet lige vil det erodere USAs supermagtsstatus. Trump har udvandet NATOs musket\u00e9r-ed, &#8230; Under sin f\u00f8rste pr\u00e6sidentperiode var Trump meget klar omkring, at han \u00f8nsker, at USA skal tr\u00e6kke sig af NATO samarbejdet. Under valgkampen i 2024 fulgte han flere gange op p\u00e5 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":2913,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[26,27,28,29,35],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2912","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-brics","category-finansmarkeder","category-geooekonomi","category-geopolitik","category-topledelse"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>USA efter NATO - 3 - udenrigspolitisk - Kraft Scharling<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Et USA efter NATO var udenrigspolitisk ut\u00e6nkeligt for 3 m\u00e5neder siden. Alt andet lige vil det erodere USAs supermagtsstatus\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/us-after-nato-3-foreign-policy\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"USA efter NATO - 3 - udenrigspolitisk - Kraft Scharling\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Et USA efter NATO var udenrigspolitisk ut\u00e6nkeligt for 3 m\u00e5neder siden. Alt andet lige vil det erodere USAs supermagtsstatus\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/us-after-nato-3-foreign-policy\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Kraft Scharling\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-04-20T08:01:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-Navy.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1038\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"576\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Henrik Kraft Scharling\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Henrik Kraft Scharling\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Henrik Kraft Scharling\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/9d2c1bfdbe9593d413234cdde1c1731a\"},\"headline\":\"USA efter NATO &#8211; 3 &#8211; udenrigspolitisk\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-04-20T08:01:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1671,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/USA-Navy.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"BRICS\",\"Finansmarkeder\",\"Geo\u00f8konomi\",\"Geopolitik\",\"Topledelse\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\\\/\",\"name\":\"USA efter NATO - 3 - udenrigspolitisk - Kraft Scharling\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/USA-Navy.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-04-20T08:01:00+00:00\",\"description\":\"Et USA efter NATO var udenrigspolitisk ut\u00e6nkeligt for 3 m\u00e5neder siden. Alt andet lige vil det erodere USAs supermagtsstatus\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/USA-Navy.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/USA-Navy.jpg\",\"width\":1038,\"height\":576,\"caption\":\"US foreign and security policy\"},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kraft Scharling\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kraft Scharling\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/KraftScharling_logo_org-e1739344438206.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/KraftScharling_logo_org-e1739344438206.png\",\"width\":360,\"height\":360,\"caption\":\"Kraft Scharling\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kraftscharling.dk\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/9d2c1bfdbe9593d413234cdde1c1731a\",\"name\":\"Henrik Kraft Scharling\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"US after NATO 3 Foreign Policy - Kraft Scharling","description":"A US after NATO was unthinkable for foreign policy reasons just 3 months ago. It will likely erode US superpower status","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/us-after-nato-3-foreign-policy\/","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"USA efter NATO - 3 - udenrigspolitisk - Kraft Scharling","og_description":"Et USA efter NATO var udenrigspolitisk ut\u00e6nkeligt for 3 m\u00e5neder siden. Alt andet lige vil det erodere USAs supermagtsstatus","og_url":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/us-after-nato-3-foreign-policy\/","og_site_name":"Kraft Scharling","article_published_time":"2025-04-20T08:01:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1038,"height":576,"url":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-Navy.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Henrik Kraft Scharling","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Henrik Kraft Scharling","Estimated reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/"},"author":{"name":"Henrik Kraft Scharling","@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/#\/schema\/person\/9d2c1bfdbe9593d413234cdde1c1731a"},"headline":"USA efter NATO &#8211; 3 &#8211; udenrigspolitisk","datePublished":"2025-04-20T08:01:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/"},"wordCount":1671,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-Navy.jpg","articleSection":["BRICS","Finansmarkeder","Geo\u00f8konomi","Geopolitik","Topledelse"],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/","url":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/","name":"US after NATO 3 Foreign Policy - Kraft Scharling","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-Navy.jpg","datePublished":"2025-04-20T08:01:00+00:00","description":"A US after NATO was unthinkable for foreign policy reasons just 3 months ago. It will likely erode US superpower status","inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/usa-efter-nato-3-udenrigspolitisk\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-Navy.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/USA-Navy.jpg","width":1038,"height":576,"caption":"US foreign and security policy"},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/","name":"Kraft Scharling","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/#organization","name":"Kraft Scharling","url":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/KraftScharling_logo_org-e1739344438206.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/wp-content\/uploads\/KraftScharling_logo_org-e1739344438206.png","width":360,"height":360,"caption":"Kraft Scharling"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/#\/schema\/person\/9d2c1bfdbe9593d413234cdde1c1731a","name":"Henrik Kraft Scharling"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2912","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2912"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2912\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2919,"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2912\/revisions\/2919"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2913"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2912"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2912"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kraftscharling.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2912"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}