American Lives Are at Stake if NATO Doesn't Set a Better Course | Opinion

On Memorial Day, Americans rightly honor the more than 1 million warriors who've sacrificed their lives in the line of duty. We did the same on the recent 80th anniversary of the D-Day invasion by Allied troops in Normandy.

But our annual nod to past sacrifices means less and less if we're unwilling to honor what they fought for. American conflicts from the war for independence to World War II shared common traits—a desire on the part of Americans to fight, with a clear and limited purpose, and management of those conflicts by Americans or in close cooperation with American allies.

Decades of mission creep have steered us away from those traits and into a dangerous place.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was established after World War II as a strategic, defensive alliance to deter the Soviet Union's ambitions in Western Europe.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO sought new purposes, evolving into an expeditionary force with interventions beyond its traditional area of operations, including the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and now, indirectly, Ukraine. This shift has led to contentious debates about NATO's role and its impact on global stability, with some arguing that its expansion, especially toward Ukraine, has exacerbated tensions with Russia rather than ensuring peace.

NATO's failure to evolve to meet the challenges of the current world has significant implications for American interests and global stability. CIA Director and once U.S. ambassador to Russia William Burns noted in 2008 that NATO's post-Cold War expansion would poke the Russian bear so to speak, stating, "Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin) ... I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests."

And NATO can't be solely blamed for Russia's aggression into Ukraine. The alliance's refusal to give Ukraine a hard "no" hasn't helped. Russia and Ukraine have sustained nearly 500,000 military casualties in the last two years, and there doesn't look to be an end in sight.

This cycle of engagement without clear objectives or successful outcomes has left deep scars, both on the affected regions and on America's credibility and resources.

Involvement in Ukraine risks escalating the conflict and drawing the alliance, specifically the U.S., deeper into a prolonged and deadly war. The financial and military aid the U.S. provides—we provided more to Ukraine in the last funding bill than the annual cost of the U.S. Marine Corps—strains American resources, and the presence of U.S. advisors increases the risk of American casualties.

We inch closer and closer to escalation with a nuclear power in a war that isn't even ours.

As a Green Beret who has led men into combat, I've seen the brutal costs of war firsthand. I've watched peers blown up in their prime, families destroyed, and futures lost to alcohol and suicide. These are not just numbers; they are lives shattered, and lives that can't even point to a foreign policy success the way the World War II generation could.

To combat veterans, the problem is clear. America's military conflicts today lack the traits that so often characterized our earlier campaigns. Today's wars are hive-mind affairs led by global coalitions. Their purpose is unclear, and often there is no discernable goal. Most Americans are either barely invested against these fights, or are confused about what to think about them.

There is a persistent refusal to engage with the world as it really is in favor of chasing idealistic hopes of democracy. This misguided pursuit often leads to disaster, leaving Americans to pay the cost.

Europe reaps the benefits of America standing guard at their doorstep and continues asking for more. Former British Prime Minister David Cameron stated U.S. support for Ukraine is the "keystone in the arch" of the fight for democracy, while urging further assistance for Ukraine to not just "hold the line" but to "go on the offensive" in 2025. When former President Donald Trump asked everyone in the alliance to pay their fair share, the elites lost their collective minds, clutching their pearls at summits, terrified of losing the respect of European partners.

NATO will celebrate its 75th anniversary this year, and no doubt there are many talking about what the next 75 years should look like. As a combat veteran with more than 20 years' experience, I can tell you—the future of NATO is America playing a realistic, fair part in the alliance. That part should not be characterized by a windfall of American taxpayer dollars, not to mention the potential cost in lives if war between Ukraine and Russia escalates into Western Europe.

Americans have stood with Europeans to storm the beaches and end tyranny before. But those moments were predicated on shared interests and mutual sacrifices.

To truly honor the military heroes of our past, we would do well to remember the clear-eyed purpose for which they fought. We need leaders who respect these American values and are committed to steering NATO back to its original mission of true defense and stability, rather than allowing it to drift into endless conflicts.

Jason Beardsley is director of veterans' initiatives at Stand Together and senior advisor to Concerned Veterans for America. He is a 22-year veteran of the United States Army and Navy.

The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.