Sign In Subscribe
Hero Banner

|

☰
  • Home
  • News
    • Top Stories
    • US
    • World
    • Elections Polls
    • Business
    • Tech
    • The Media
    • Genz
    • Public Policy
    • AI News
  • Voices
    • Opinions
    • Proposals
    • Explainers
    • Influencers
    • Pundits
  • Multimedia
  • Get Involved
  • About
Donate
Home » NATO is an Obsolete and Expensive Relic
Defense and Foreign Affairs

NATO is an Obsolete and Expensive Relic

Ryan DulaneyBy Ryan DulaneyMay 22, 2024Updated:June 4, 2025No Comments4 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr WhatsApp VKontakte Email
nato
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

NATO is inflated, over-expensive and should be dissolved. It has outlived its original purpose, and instead of working to include the Russian Federation, it continued to make an enemy of it. If Ukraine can be funded to the degree that it can hold its own against Russia without being a NATO member–NATO has become irrelevant, but it remains an exorbitant cost to the U.S. 

The alliance originally intended to defend Western democracy has become obsolete. Non-intervention and military aid packages are sufficient to defeat the ‘mighty’ Russian threat.

Russia is both unable and unwilling to conquer Europe, it is not even able to conquer Ukraine. The other emerging threat, China, is similarly focused on Taiwan. Both Russia and China have close linguistic, cultural and historical ties with Ukraine and Taiwan, respectively. These superpowers are militarily focused on pseudo-domestic issues, not global hegemony as the USSR was in the Cold War.

NATO was formed to counter the hegemonic aspirations of the USSR. In 1949, the USSR was an imminent threat to democracy, specifically in Europe. Twelve Western nations joined together to form NATO to oppose the growing global communist influence. The Soviet Union actively sought global domination and competed with the U.S. for global hegemony. The USSR mimicked NATO with the Warsaw Pact.

The USSR collapsed in 1991. After decades of economic erosion, Gorbachev pursued reformist policies that led to the dissolution of the state. Subsequently, the Soviet republics became independent. The Soviet collapse led to the weakening of the Russian state and the end of the Cold War. Importantly, the opponent that NATO was formed to oppose had vanished.

Despite this NATO not only persisted but expanded, the most significant of these expansions included ex-Soviet states in both 96’ and 04’. When Russia invaded Ukraine, many suspected it was an attempt to prevent the state from falling into the hands of ever-expanding NATO. However, Russia is unable to defeat Ukraine, which is an ex-Soviet non-NATO member decisively, thus signaling that it would be unable to threaten individual NATO members like Baltic nations, Poland or Norway. 

Unfortunately, many NATO members are delinquent on the 2% GDP defense spending requirement. This means that the U.S. picks up the slack for an alliance that has outlived its purpose. Meanwhile, Russia, which NATO is intended to defend against, is struggling just to defeat Ukraine.

This indicates that the cost for the existence of NATO is no longer justifiable. The immense amount of aid for Ukraine is evidence that non-NATO members will receive aid regardless of membership status when it is politically and militarily convenient. This leads to the important question, if the West will provide aid to states, regardless of membership, why finance NATO if nations can receive effective aid as a non-NATO member?

NATO should be dissolved in favor of European nations being responsible for their defense. Alliances are not the issue, the issue is that the U.S. is unable to effectively address its domestic problems when it is funding a global military alliance. It is time for domestically focused spending.

It is not as if Russia and China could make functional alliances with former NATO states if NATO is dissolved. These nations are generally liberal democracies and are naturally antagonistic to Moscow and Beijing. It is not as if these ex-NATO nations will spontaneously adopt an affinity for Putin or Xi just to feel safe. Trusting the contemporary U.S. commitment to NATO is certainly a risk, but you would be better off trusting your security needs to a used car salesman than Russia or China.

Multipolarism would be an outcome of NATO dissolution, as well as a universal decrease in the potential outbreak of a great power conflict. However, not only is multipolarism a desirable path to international stability, but it is also a viable option for the rejuvenation of the U.S. Shifting foreign defense spending to domestic issues would likely stimulate economic, social and political healing which is needed in the current state of affairs in the U.S.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the individual author.

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr WhatsApp Email
Previous ArticlePaving the Path to Health Equity for DACA Recipients
Next Article American Monarchy Through the Executive
Ryan Dulaney
  • X (Twitter)
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn

Ryan Dulaney contributes insightful articles across a variety of topics.Passionate about delivering engaging and informative content.Dedicated to keeping readers informed and inspired.Explores stories that spark curiosity and thoughtful discussion.

Related Posts

Political Humor Roundup: The First Week of March 2026

March 6, 2026

Kristi Noem Replaced as Head of Homeland Security

March 6, 2026

Pro-Palestinian Green Party Candidate’s Anti-Israel Agenda Fuels Senate Hearing Stunt

March 6, 2026

The Great MAGA Unraveling

March 6, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

HOT TAKES

Pakistan’s Hypocrisy

March 6, 2026

The TikTok Power Grab

March 5, 2026

So Long, “ICE Barbie”

March 5, 2026

Leftists’ Selective Outrage Over Iran War

March 4, 2026
Connect with Us
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
Don't Miss
Culture

Political Humor Roundup: The First Week of March 2026

By Jason LunaMarch 6, 20260

1. Biden Asks Why Trump Didn’t Just Bomb Ayatollah In The Leg – The Babylon…

Kristi Noem Replaced as Head of Homeland Security

March 6, 2026

Pro-Palestinian Green Party Candidate’s Anti-Israel Agenda Fuels Senate Hearing Stunt

March 6, 2026

The Great MAGA Unraveling

March 6, 2026
Subscribe to ONC's Newsletter

Get the latest balanced blend of news, opinion and policy proposals from OUR NATIONAL CONVERSATION. Published weekly.

Our National Conversation

Less Hate. More Debate.

HOME NEWS VOICES MULTIMEDIA GET INVOLVED ABOUT
Donate