2026-05-09 08:30 EDT / 福克斯新闻网
退役中将基思·凯洛格告知特朗普，北约需“与欧洲建立新的防御同盟”，因各成员国预算未能兑现承诺
作者：埃弗拉特·拉赫特 福克斯新闻网
发布于2026年5月9日 美国东部时间上午8:30
退役将军基思·凯洛格称北约已成“臃肿架构”
这位退役将军认为，面对复苏的俄罗斯以及日益扩大的能力差距，北约必须重新思考其架构。
NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章了！
收听本文
8分钟
本文是审视北约联盟面临挑战系列报道的第一篇。
前高级国家安全顾问基思·凯洛格告诉福克斯新闻数字频道，北约已沦为“过于依赖美国军事力量的臃肿架构”。
随着唐纳德·特朗普总统施压北约盟友增加国防开支——下令从德国撤出5000名美军，并暗示可能削减在西班牙和意大利的驻军——联盟内部出现了更深层次的担忧：尽管欧洲国防预算多年来持续增长，但北约仍严重依赖美国的军事力量，从导弹防御、情报到后勤和核威慑均是如此。
政治承诺与实际军事能力之间日益扩大的差距，如今正推动联盟内部呼吁进行结构改革，因为北约正面临来自俄罗斯的日益严峻的威胁以及中东的动荡局势。
特朗普“有权对欧洲在伊朗问题上的背信弃义感到愤怒”，前撒切尔顾问称
退役中将基思·凯洛格告诉福克斯新闻数字频道，北约的失衡并非理论层面的问题，也并非新近出现的问题。“我曾告诉总统……或许你应该谈谈与北约建立分层关系，”凯洛格描述了他在特朗普第一任期内就联盟未来与特朗普的对话。“……我们需要建立一种新的，恕我直言，一种新的北约，一种与欧洲的新防御同盟。”
凯洛格补充道，联盟在政治上扩张了，但在军事上并未扩张——这造成了他眼中承诺与实际能力之间日益扩大的差距。
北约秘书长马克·吕特、唐纳德·特朗普总统与英国首相基尔·斯塔默于2025年6月25日在荷兰海牙举行的北约国家元首和政府首脑峰会期间合影。（本·斯坦索尔/彭博社/路透社）
“你们最初只有12个成员国，如今增至32个，在此过程中，我认为你们削弱了其影响力，”他辩称，称如今的北约是“一个非常臃肿的架构”。
“他们没有在国防上投入资金。他们的国防工业和国防力量已经萎缩。看看英国现在的情况，他们几乎无法部署部队：他们有两艘航母，都在维修中。他们的旅级部队每六个里才有一个能正常运作。看看他们的能力，根本就不够。所以我认为我们需要认清这一点，然后说，好吧，我们需要一些不同的东西，”凯洛格告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。他是美国优先外交政策研究所美国安全中心的联合主席。
但并非所有人都认为该联盟正在失去其重要性。
“它从未像现在这样重要，”美国陆军战争学院研究教授约翰·R·德尼说道，他认为北约仍是美国国家安全的核心。
“原因有两方面，”他说。“其一，这是我们相对于中国和俄罗斯的比较优势……他们没有任何类似的组织。”
“其二……北约为我们最重要的贸易和投资伙伴关系的安全与稳定提供了保障，”他补充道，这里指的是北美与欧洲之间的经济联系。
北约盟友在俄罗斯战机侵犯领空后发生冲突，考验联盟决心
北约各国国防部长于2025年8月20日在布鲁塞尔举行会议，屏幕上显示各国领导人远程出席会议讨论乌克兰问题。（福克斯新闻）
依赖：是设计使然还是弱点？
根据伦敦智库亨利·杰克逊学会的巴拉克·塞纳提供的分析，到2010年左右，美国约占北约国防开支的65%至70%。
“欧洲盟友一直以来都依赖美国，”凯洛格在谈到北约欧洲成员国时说道。
“盟友们总体上是有意通过相互协作来实现威慑和防御的，”德尼解释道，联盟的存在是为了“汇集资源”并“整合各自的优势”。
德尼指出，地面部队就是美国从联盟中获益的一个明显例子，他指出“地面上的盟国机械化步兵部队数量远多于美军”。
北约秘书长暗示盟友可能对霍尔木兹海峡采取行动，警告对美国存在“不健康的依赖”
不过，他承认这种依赖有时已经过度。
“过去……可以公平地说，欧洲盟友在常规防御方面过度依赖美国，”他说道，这指的是2000年代的情况。
他表示，这在一定程度上是由美国的优先事项驱动的——当时华盛顿敦促欧洲盟友专注于阿富汗和伊拉克的战争，而非领土防御。
一名波兰陆军士兵坐在坦克上，身后飘扬着北约旗帜，2015年6月18日，波兰扎甘，北约“高贵跳跃”快速反应部队演习期间。（肖恩·加拉格尔/盖蒂图片社）
塞纳将北约描述为“形式上集体，但功能上不对称”，美国提供了不成比例的“高端能力”份额。
这种不对称在核威慑方面最为明显。
塞纳表示，美国提供了北约绝大多数的核武库——包括洲际弹道导弹、潜射系统和战略轰炸机——这意味着威慑最终依赖于美国会进行报复的假设。
一名北约官员告诉福克斯新闻数字频道，“美国的核威慑力量无法替代，但显然欧洲需要加大投入。这一点毫无疑问。我们的国防和安全需要实现更好的平衡。这既是因为我们看到美国在全球发挥的重要作用以及它所需要投入的资源，也是因为这样做才公平。”
“好消息是，”该官员补充道，“盟友们正是这么做的。他们正在加大投入，共同努力——并与美国一道——确保我们集体拥有所需的一切，以威慑和保卫横跨欧亚大西洋地区的10亿人口。”
特朗普觊觎格陵兰岛之际，北约启动北极安全攻势
2025年3月12日，在德国霍恩费尔斯附近的“联合精神25”军事演习中，美国陆军第12战斗航空旅的波音CH-47支奴干直升机飞过立陶宛的“维尔卡斯”步兵战车。
北约无法替代的系统
除核武器外，这种依赖贯穿于联盟的作战核心。
塞纳指出，美国提供的情报、监视和侦察系统以及后勤和指挥系统，对北约的行动至关重要。
“没有美国的情报和监视能力，北约将失去态势感知和早期预警能力，”塞纳说道，并补充道，“这意味着，例如，俄罗斯可以攻击欧洲。从理论上讲，如果没有北约且美国不介入，欧洲将无法及时察觉，或者需要太长时间才能组织自卫。”
凯洛格也表示，欧洲大部分地区的军事能力都达不到顶级水平。
“大体上来说，如果要给他们的装备打分，从A到F，他们大概只能算B级或C级玩家，”他说。“这算不上一流水平。”
他指出，防空和导弹防御是关键差距所在，他指出尽管欧洲国家依赖美国制造的爱国者和萨德等系统，“他们没有可比的系统”。
凯洛格将此归咎于多年来的投资不足，他表示欧洲国防工业“已经萎缩”，并补充说美国现在也在“重新学习这一点”。
特朗普重申美国“将永远支持北约”，同时对联盟表示怀疑
唐纳德·特朗普总统与波兰总统安杰伊·杜达在2019年12月4日英国沃特福德举行的北约领导人峰会期间的工作午餐会上交谈。（凯文·拉马尔克/路透社）
德尼表示，如今的情况更为复杂。
“联盟的国防开支一直在增加……2022年之后更是大幅飙升，”他说道，指出2014年俄罗斯吞并克里米亚是一个转折点。
但他警告称，能力提升需要时间，许多改进仍需数年才能全面部署。
德尼指出，欧洲最近购买美国系统就是能力不断提升的证据，他指出包括波兰、罗马尼亚、挪威和丹麦在内的国家正在从美国采购F-35战斗机。
“你不可能一夜之间造出F-35，”他说道，并补充道，许多此类改进需要数年时间才能完全实现。
一名北约官员告诉福克斯新闻数字频道，该联盟“需要更进一步、更快地行动”以应对日益严峻的威胁，并指出各国国防部长在2025年6月达成了新的能力目标。
该官员表示，优先事项包括防空和导弹防御、远程武器、后勤和大型地面部队，他指出尽管细节仍属机密，但计划要求将防空和导弹防御能力提高五倍，增加“数千辆”装甲车辆和坦克，以及“数百万发”炮弹。北约还旨在将后勤、运输和医疗支持等关键支援能力提升一倍。
该官员补充道，盟友们正在增加对军舰、飞机、无人机、远程导弹以及太空和网络能力的投资，同时提高战备水平并升级指挥和控制系统。
“这些目标现已纳入国家计划，”该官员说道，并补充道，盟友们必须展示他们将如何通过持续的国防开支和能力发展来实现这些目标。
这位北约官员还指出，欧洲盟友领导着中欧和东欧的多国部队，而美国和加拿大则作为波兰和拉脱维亚的框架国家，同时开展空中巡逻任务以及北约在科索沃的科索沃部队行动。
2011年4月2日，瑞典空军的JAS 39“鹰狮”战斗机从瑞典南部起飞。（美联社照片/斯堪的纳维亚通讯社/帕特里克·索德斯特伦，资料图）
如果美国兵力紧张会发生什么？
凯洛格的警告直截了当：北约的威慑依赖于美国的存在。
“你永远都要担心的……是俄罗斯，”凯洛格说道，他在2025年曾担任特朗普的乌克兰和俄罗斯问题特使。
如果美军被牵制在其他地方，北约可能面临严重的压力——尤其是在情报和后勤领域。
对凯洛格而言，危险在于延误。“我们直到事情发生才会知道，”他说。“到那时你就无法做出回应了。”
然而，德尼表示，该联盟仍是一项战略资产，而非负担。
点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用
2025年6月22日北约峰会为期两天，世界论坛外有北约军队站岗。（雷姆科·德瓦/荷兰国家通讯社/法新社）
他认为，问题不在于北约是否仍然有效。而在于盟友们能否足够快地适应变化，以维持其有效性。
埃弗拉特·拉赫特是福克斯新闻数字频道的驻外记者，负责报道国际事务和联合国事务。在X平台@efratlachter关注她。新闻线索请发送至efrat.lachter@fox.com。
As Trump forces NATO to pay up, alliance races to close military gap with US
2026-05-09 08:30 EDT / Fox News
Retired Lt Gen Keith Kellogg told Trump the alliance needs ‘a new defensive alignment with Europe’ as budgets fail to match promises
By Efrat Lachter Fox News
Published May 9, 2026 8:30am EDT
Ret. Gen. Keith Kellogg says NATO has become a ‘bloated architecture’
The retired general argues the alliance must rethink its structure as it faces a resurgent Russia and growing capability gaps.
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
Listen to this article
8 min
This is part one of a series examining the challenges confronting the NATO alliance.
NATO has become a “bloated architecture” too dependent on American military power, former senior national security advisor Keith Kellogg told Fox News Digital.
As President Donald Trump pressures NATO allies to spend more on defense — ordering the withdrawal of 5,000 U.S. troops from Germany and signaling possible cuts in Spain and Italy — a deeper concern is emerging inside the alliance: despite years of rising European defense budgets, NATO still depends heavily on American military power, from missile defense and intelligence to logistics and nuclear deterrence.
The growing gap between political commitments and real military capability is now fueling calls for structural changes inside the alliance as NATO confronts mounting threats from Russia and instability in the Middle East.
TRUMP ‘RIGHT TO BE OUTRAGED’ BY EUROPE’S BETRAYAL ON IRAN, SAYS FORMER THATCHER ADVISOR
NATO’s imbalance is not theoretical — and it is not new, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg told Fox News Digital, “I told the president… maybe you ought to talk about a tiered relationship with NATO,” Kellogg described conversations with Trump in his first term about the alliance’s future. “…we need to develop a new, for lack of a better term, a new NATO a new defensive alignment with Europe.”
Kellogg added the alliance has expanded politically but not militarily — creating what he sees as a growing gap between commitments and real capability.
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, President Donald Trump and Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer pose during the NATO Heads of State and Government summit in The Hague, Netherlands, on June 25, 2025.(Ben Stansall/Pool/Reuters)
“You started with 12, and you went to 32, and in the process, I think you diluted the impact,” he argued, calling today’s NATO “a very bloated architecture.”
“They haven’t put the money into defense. Their defense industry and defense forces have atrophied. When you look at the Brits right now, they could barely deploy forces: they have two aircraft carriers, both under maintenance. Their brigades are like one out of six that work. And you just look at the capability, it’s just not there. So I think we need to realize that and say, well, we need something different,” Kellogg, who is the co-chair of the Center for American Security at the America First Foreign Policy Institute, told Fox News Digital.
But not everyone agrees the alliance is losing relevance.
“It has never been more relevant,” said John R. Deni, a research professor at the U.S. Army War College, who says NATO remains central to U.S. national security.
“The reason for that is twofold,” he said. “One, it’s our comparative advantage versus the Chinese and the Russians… they don’t have anything like this.”
“And the second reason… NATO underwrites the security and stability of our most important trade and investment relationship,” he added, referring to economic ties between North America and Europe.
NATO ALLIES CLASH AFTER RUSSIAN JETS BREACH AIRSPACE, TESTING ALLIANCE RESOLVE
NATO chiefs of defense hold a meeting in Brussels on Aug. 20, 2025, with screens displaying allied leaders joining remotely to discuss Ukraine.(Fox News)
Dependence: Design or Weakness?
By around 2010, the United States accounted for roughly 65% to 70% of NATO defense spending, according to analysis provided by Barak Seener from the Henry Jackson Society, a London-based think tank.
“They’ve always been dependent on the U.S.,” Kellogg said of the European allies.
“The allies overall rely upon one another for deterrence and defense by design,” Deni said, explaining that alliances exist to “pool their resources” and “aggregate their individual strengths.”
Deni pointed to ground forces as a clear example of what the U.S. gains from the alliance, noting that “there are far more allied mechanized infantry forces on the ground than there are Americans.”
NATO CHIEF SIGNALS ALLIES MAY ACT ON HORMUZ, WARNS OF ‘UNHEALTHY CODEPENDENCE’ ON US
Still, he acknowledged that reliance has at times gone too far.
“In the past… it was fair to say that the European allies were overly reliant upon the Americans for conventional defense,” he said, pointing to the 2000s.
That, he said, was partly driven by U.S. priorities — as Washington pushed European allies to focus on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq rather than territorial defense.
A Polish Army soldier sits in a tank as a NATO flag flies behind during the NATO Noble Jump VJTF exercises on June 18, 2015, in Zagan, Poland.(Sean Gallup/Getty Images)
Seener describes NATO as “formally collective, but functionally asymmetric,” with the U.S. providing a disproportionate share of “high-end capabilities.”
That asymmetry is most visible in nuclear deterrence.
Seener said the U.S. provides the overwhelming majority of NATO’s nuclear arsenal — including intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched systems and strategic bombers — meaning deterrence ultimately relies on the assumption of U.S. retaliation.
A NATO official told Fox News Digital that, “The U.S. nuclear deterrent cannot be replaced, but it is clear that Europe needs to step up. There’s no question. There needs to be a better balance when it comes to our defense and security. Both because we see the vital role the U.S. plays around the world and the resources that it demands, and also because it is only fair.”
“The good news,” the official added, “is that the Allies are doing exactly that. They are stepping up, working together — and with the U.S. — to ensure we collectively have what we need to deter and defend one billion people living across the Euro-Atlantic area.”
NATO LAUNCHES ARCTIC SECURITY PUSH AS TRUMP EYES GREENLAND TAKEOVER
Boeing CH-47 Chinook helicopters of the U.S. Army 12th Combat Aviation Brigade fly over a Lithuanian Vilkas infantry fighting vehicle during the Allied Spirit 25 military exercise near Hohenfels, Germany, on March 12, 2025.
The Systems NATO Cannot Replace
Beyond nuclear weapons, the dependence runs through the alliance’s operational backbone.
Seener pointed to U.S.-provided intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance — as well as logistics and command systems — as essential to NATO operations.
“Without U.S. intelligence and surveillance, NATO loses situational awareness and early warning capabilities,” Seener said, adding, “So that means that Russia, for example, can attack Europe. And theoretically, if there’s no NATO and the U.S. is not involved, Europe would not be aware, or it would take it too long to be able to defend itself.”
Kellogg also says that much of Europe’s military capability falls short of top-tier systems.
“For the most part, their equipment, if you had to grade it A, B, C, D, E, F, they’re kind of like B players or C players,” he said. “It’s not the first line of work.”
He pointed to air and missile defense as a key gap, noting that while European countries rely on U.S.-made systems such as Patriot and THAAD, “they don’t have a system that’s comparable.”
Kellogg attributed that to years of underinvestment, saying European defense industries “have atrophied,” adding that the United States is also now “relearning that as well.”
TRUMP AFFIRMS US ‘WILL ALWAYS BE THERE FOR NATO,’ WHILE EXPRESSING DOUBTS ABOUT ALLIANCE
President Donald Trump and Poland’s President Andrzej Duda talk during a working lunch at the NATO leaders summit in Watford, Britain, on Dec. 4, 2019.(Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
Deni said the picture today is more mixed.
“Alliance defense spending has been up… and has spiked far more after 2022,” he said, pointing to Russia’s invasion of Crimea in 2014 as a turning point.
But he cautioned that capability gains take time, noting that many improvements are still years away from full deployment.
Deni pointed to recent European purchases of U.S. systems as evidence of growing capability, noting that countries including Poland, Romania, Norway and Denmark are acquiring the F-35 fighter jet from the U.S.
“You can’t build an F-35 overnight,” he said, adding that many of these improvements will take years to fully materialize.
A NATO official told Fox News Digital the alliance “needs to move further and faster” to meet growing threats, pointing to new capability targets agreed by defense ministers in June 2025.
Keith Kellogg speaks during the Warsaw Security Forum on Sept. 30, 2025, in Poland.(Marek Antoni Iwanczuk/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
The official said priorities include air and missile defense, long-range weapons, logistics and large land forces, noting that while details remain classified, plans call for a fivefold increase in air and missile defense, “thousands more” armored vehicles and tanks, and “millions more” artillery shells. NATO also aims to double key enabling capabilities such as logistics, transportation and medical support.
The official added that allies are increasing investments in warships, aircraft, drones, long-range missiles, as well as space and cyber capabilities, while boosting readiness and modernizing command and control.
“These targets are now included in national plans,” the official said, adding that allies must demonstrate how they will meet them through sustained defense spending and capability development.
The NATO official also noted that European allies lead multinational forces across Central and Eastern Europe, while the U.S. and Canada serve as framework nations in Poland and Latvia, alongside ongoing air policing missions and NATO’s KFOR operation in Kosovo.
A Swedish Air Force JAS 39 Gripen fighter aircraft takes off from southern Sweden on April 2, 2011.(AP Photo/Scanpix/Patric Soderstrom, File)
What happens if the U.S. is stretched?
Kellogg’s warning is direct: NATO’s deterrence depends on U.S. presence.
“The one you always have to worry about… is Russia,” Kellogg, who was Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia in 2025, said.
If U.S. forces are tied down elsewhere, NATO could face serious strain — particularly in areas like intelligence and logistics.
For Kellogg, the danger is delay. “We won’t know until it happens,” he said. “And then you won’t be able to respond to it.”
Deni, however, said the alliance remains a strategic asset — not a liability.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
A NATO military force stands guard outside the World Forum in The Hague ahead of the two-day NATO summit on June 22, 2025.(Remko de Waal/ANP/AFP)
The question, he suggests, is not whether NATO still works. It is whether allies can adapt fast enough to keep it working.
Efrat Lachter is a foreign correspondent for Fox News Digital covering international affairs and the United Nations. Follow her on X @efratlachter. Stories can be sent to efrat.lachter@fox.com.
发表回复