Can America Still Protect Its Allies?September/October 2019 197the right thing regarding world aairs.”) Yet the same poll showed that
an overwhelming majority o those surveyed still preferred the United
States to China as the world’s leading power. The U.S.-led world order
does not appear to be crumbling. No ally has opted out o the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty or threatened to do so. Indeed, no ally has
even embarked on a major military buildup. N has modestly im-
proved its military burden sharing since 2014, but most o the United
States’ security partners still spend a historically modest one to two
percent o on their militaries, much less than during the Cold War.
Poland and the Baltic states have increased their defense spending to
two percent o , but they have not taken the steps, such as fortifying
their borders, that one would expect i they truly feared a Russian inva-
sion. U.S. allies may be nervous, but they do not appear to be panick-
ing or radically changing their own national security strategies.
Despite his rhetoric, moreover, Trump has staed his administra-
tion with gures who are committed to the United States’ presence
abroad. Neither Secretary o State Mike Pompeo nor National Secu-
rity Adviser John Bolton is known for his dovishness or isolationism.
The U.S. defense budget has continued to grow during Trump’s ten-
ure, and the president has requested additional money from Congress
to develop advanced weapons. U.S. troop deployments have generally
remained static, and in some places, such as on the eastern ank o
, they have actually increased. Trump has hosted high-level meet-
ings with the leaders o most o the countries—Japan and South Ko-
rea, Poland and the Baltic states—on the frontlines o struggles with
China and Russia, assuaging their fears o being abandoned in a crisis.
In these respects, counterintuitively, the transition from George W.
Bush to Barack Obama to Trump shows more continuity than change.
These have been good steps. But there is a ne art to both deter-
rence and reassurance: they require constant attention, as both are
ultimately in the eye o the beholder. In addition to avoiding capri-
cious threats to pull out o alliances, the United States should make
its military commitments more credible in ways that do not require a
major increase in combat forces stationed abroad. Washington, for
example, could improve its capabilities in Poland by strengthening its
logistical and headquarters assets there (as the Atlantic Council has
recently recommended) and agreeing to deploy U.S. troops on a per-
manent, rather than rotational, basis. The most overdue policy
changes, however, lie not in the realm o¤ Department o¤ Defense force19_O'Hanlon_PP_Blues.indd 197 7/22/19 5:54 PM