The Pentagon has confirmed a reduction in the number of US brigade combat teams permanently assigned to Europe from four to three, returning force levels to those of 2021, before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The move, described as the result of a “comprehensive, multi-layered process,” includes a temporary delay in the planned deployment of approximately 4,000 troops to Poland, a country that Washington had repeatedly praised as a model ally. The decision, which effectively removes around 5,000 soldiers from the European theatre, has sent a jolt through alliance capitals, even as NATO’s leadership sought to downplay its immediate impact.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte insisted the adjustment would be “gradual and structured” and would not undermine the alliance’s defence plans. Speaking in Brussels, he argued that the United States must pivot more towards Asia and that the time had come for Europe to “take a bigger role together with Canada” in shouldering conventional defence responsibilities. Viewed from Washington, the reduction is framed as a necessary recalibration, with Vice President JD Vance bluntly telling European media that the move was not a withdrawal but an effort to force the continent to become “self-reliant.” Yet analysts in London note that the cancellation of the Poland deployment—announced on the same day Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth spoke with Polish Deputy Prime Minister Kosiniak-Kamysz—has exposed a widening gap between US assurances and allied expectations.

For Poland, the decision is particularly stinging. Warsaw had eagerly positioned itself as Washington’s foremost partner in Eastern Europe, hosting a permanent US garrison and investing heavily in American military hardware. The indefinite postponement of the 4,000-strong contingent, which was meant to bolster the country’s eastern flank, has left Polish defence officials scrambling to reassess their force posture. From Berlin to Rome, the reaction has been one of grim acceptance mixed with anxiety. European officials privately acknowledge that the US drawdown is not a one-off but the vanguard of a broader reduction. Le Figaro captures the mood with an analogy: Europeans, like a child thrown into water by parents, must now learn to swim. The Pentagon’s next move, according to sources cited by La Vanguardia, will be to cut back the US’s crisis-response forces available to NATO, a step that goes beyond static troop numbers and directly affects the alliance’s rapid-reaction capability.

The implications extend well beyond force levels. The reduction coincides with reports that Washington is scaling back its commitments under the NATO Force Model, the mechanism through which allies pledge troops for contingencies. Reuters, citing three sources, indicates that the Trump administration intends to inform allies of a significant reduction in the military capabilities it will offer for crises or major wars. This, combined with the troop cuts, signals a fundamental shift in transatlantic burden-sharing. While Rutte’s public stance is one of reassurance, behind closed doors NATO planners are already gaming out scenarios with a diminished US conventional footprint. The coming months are likely to see intensified European efforts to fill the gap, but as Kommersant notes from Moscow, the Kremlin views these developments as a validation of its strategy to fracture the alliance. The question now is whether Europe can translate its rhetorical commitments into credible defence spending before the US withdrawal accelerates further.