Pete Hegseth, the US Secretary of Defense, has reignited a controversy that many in Whitehall had hoped was dormant. In a series of pointed remarks, Hegseth questioned the burden-sharing within Nato, specifically targeting the alliance's British-led Baltic patrols. This is not mere political grandstanding.
It is a strategic pivot that signals a potential decoupling of US security guarantees from the European theatre. For years, the British-led enhanced Forward Presence (eFP) in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania has been a tripwire against Russian aggression. The US has provided critical enablers: intelligence, logistics, and air cover.
Without them, the entire concept of deterrence on Nato's eastern flank collapses. The threat vector here is transparent. The Kremlin views any reduction in US force posture as an open invitation for hybrid warfare.
We have already seen Russian naval activity in the Baltic spike 40% in the last quarter. If Hegseth's rhetoric translates into policy, the British Army will find itself holding a line without the necessary reserves. The defence establishment must now model worst-case scenarios: a standalone British battlegroup facing a Russian snap exercise.
The logistics are brutal. The UK does not have the strategic lift to reinforce the Baltics without US support. This is an intelligence failure in the making.
Losing the B-52 rotations from RAF Fairford would leave the Baltic gap exposed. The time for diplomatic hand-wringing is over. Whitehall needs to activate contingency plans, including prepositioned stocks and streamlined procurement for anti-access systems.
The message from Washington is clear: pay your share or watch the alliance unravel.
