The US president has been bitterly criticising the alliance in recent weeks over its reluctance to join the war in Iran.
近几周，美国总统一直严厉批评该联盟，原因是其不愿参与伊朗的战争。
President Donald Trump met Nato secretary general Mark Rutte on April 8 for what Rutte described as a “very frank, very open” discussion. The pair are reported to have discussed the US-Israeli war against Iran at which, according to White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt, Trump believes that Nato was “tested and they failed”.
美国总统唐纳德·特朗普于4月8日会见了北约秘书长马克·鲁特，鲁特形容这次讨论是“非常坦诚、非常开放”的。据报道，两人讨论了美国与以色列针对伊朗的战争，白宫发言人卡罗琳·利维特表示，特朗普认为北约“经受了考验，并且失败了”。
The president later posted to his Truth Social platform that “NATO WASN’T THERE WHEN WE NEEDED THEM, AND THEY WON’T BE THERE IF WE NEED THEM AGAIN.”
总统随后在他的Truth Social平台上发帖称：“当我们需要他们的时候，北约不在那里，当我们再次需要他们的时候，他们也不会在那里。”
The US president’s meeting with Rutte came a week after he told Reuters press agency that he was “absolutely” considering withdrawing the US from Nato, after America’s allies refused to join the US-Israeli campaign against Iran. But this is very unlikely to occur for three reasons.
美国总统与鲁特的会面是在他告诉路透社记者，他“绝对”考虑将美国从北约撤出，此前美国盟友拒绝参与美国与以色列针对伊朗的行动之后发生的。但出于三个原因，这种情况发生的可能性极低。
First, in 2023, Congress enacted a law that prohibits the president from “suspending, terminating, denouncing, or withdrawing the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty” — which established the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (Nato) — without the advice and consent of the Senate or an act of Congress. It is extremely unlikely that this will be changed before the midterm elections in November and impossible subsequently if the Democrats end up controlling the House of Representatives.
首先，2023年，国会通过了一项法律，禁止总统在未经参议院建议或国会通过的情况下，“暂停、终止、宣布或将美国从北大西洋条约”——即建立北大西洋公约组织（北约）——撤出。在11月中期选举之前，这一点极不可能改变；如果民主党最终控制了众议院，则后续也无法改变。
The second reason is that Nato membership is popular among Americans. A Pew survey conducted in 2025 showed that 66% of US respondents thought that America benefited from Nato membership while 32% thought the opposite. While, as in many things, the US is divided – with more Democrat voters (77%) supporting Nato membership than Republicans (45%) – it’s clear that, on the whole, Americans approve of Nato membership.
第二个原因是，北约成员资格在美国很受欢迎。皮尤研究中心在2025年进行的一项调查显示，66%的美国受访者认为美国从北约成员资格中受益，而32%认为恰恰相反。虽然美国在许多方面是分裂的——民主党选民（77%）支持北约成员资格的比例高于共和党（45%）——但很明显，总的来说，美国人支持北约成员资格。
The third reason is that leaving Nato would significantly weaken the US militarily. More than half a century of research by historians and international relations specialists has concluded that leaving Nato would also significantly weaken the US.
第三个原因是，退出北约将极大地削弱美国的军事力量。历史学家和国际关系专家五十多年的研究得出结论，退出北约也会极大地削弱美国。
In 1989, historian Paul Kennedy’s detailed study of wars over a period of 500 years, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, found that a decisive feature of success in war is the resources that parties to the conflict can mobilise. Kennedy cites the examples of the two world wars and demonstrates that a key reason why Germany was defeated was that the allies could mobilise many more resources in manpower, arms production and economic assets than Germany and its allies. Eventually, this proved decisive in both conflicts.
1989年，历史学家保罗·肯尼迪撰写的关于跨越500年战争的详细研究《大国兴衰》，发现战争成功的决定性特征是冲突各方能够动员的资源。肯尼迪引用了两次世界大战的例子，并证明了德国战败的一个关键原因是，盟国在人力、武器生产和经济资产方面能够动员的资源远多于德国及其盟国。最终，这一点在两次冲突中都起到了决定性作用。
Research into quantifying the military capacity of nations has been conducted for more than half a century as part of the Correlates of War project founded in 1963 by American political scientist J. David Singer. The project aims to systematically collect data about the causes and consequences of wars.
关于量化国家军事能力的研究，作为美国政治学家J. David Singer于1963年创立的《战争相关因素》项目的一部分，已经进行了半个多世纪。该项目旨在系统地收集有关战争的成因和后果的数据。
One of the datasets collected in the project is called the Composite Index of National Capability. This combines data on the demographic, industrial, economic and military capabilities of nations, including the US and China. The higher the index score the more resources a county has to fight wars.
该项目中收集的数据集之一被称为“国家能力综合指数”。它结合了包括美国和中国在内的国家的人口、工业、经济和军事能力数据。指数得分越高，一个国家进行战争的资源就越多。
Scores in the Composite Index of National Capability of the Top Nations
顶级国家国家能力综合指数得分
The chart shows the size of the index for the top countries in the database. China is the most powerful nation in the chart with a score of 23 on the index. The US comes a rather distant second with a score of 13.
该图表显示了数据库中顶级国家的指数规模。中国是图表中实力最强的国家，指数得分为23。美国排名第二，得分是13。
There are five Nato nations in the chart in addition to the US. They are Germany, Turkey, the UK, France and Italy. The total score of all six Nato members is 20 – much closer to the Chinese total.
除了美国之外，图表中的还有五个北约国家。它们是德国、土耳其、英国、法国和意大利。所有六个北约成员国的总分是20分——这更接近中国的总分。
The chart does not include the scores for the remaining Nato member states, but when they are added to the total the Nato score is well above that of China. So the assumption that the US can go it alone in a war with China is doubtful.
该图表没有包括其余北约成员国的得分，但如果将这些得分加到总分中，北约的总分将远高于中国。因此，美国能够独自与中国进行战争的假设是可疑的。
How Article 5 works
第五条如何运作
Article 5 of the Nato charter stipulates that an armed attack against one member state is considered an attack against all, triggering collective defence by all the member states. A recent report by the US Naval War College concluded that: “A large and growing body of evidence suggests that the PLA (People’s Liberation Army) is preparing credible capabilities to invade Taiwan”. The report argued that extensive deception will be used by China to confuse its opponents when the war is launched with rapid action by its armed forces to create a fait accompli. It notes that this type of blitzkrieg attack is very often successful.
北约宪章第五条规定，对一个成员国的武装攻击被视为对所有成员国的攻击，从而触发所有成员国的集体防御。美国海军战争学院最近的一份报告得出结论：“越来越多的证据表明，中国人民解放军（PLA）正在准备具备入侵台湾的可信能力。”该报告认为，中国将在发动战争时使用广泛的欺骗手段来混淆对手，并利用其武装部队的快速行动制造既成事实。报告指出，这种闪电战类型的攻击非常成功。
If this occurred, then since the US has military advisers in Taiwan and military assets in the region that would need to be neutralised in the first phase of the war if the invasion were to be successful this would trigger Article 5 of the Nato charter. In that case China would find itself at war with 32 Nato countries – not to mention countries in the Far East, such as Japan, Indonesia and Vietnam, who have serious concerns about Chinese aggression, but are not members of the alliance.
如果发生这种情况，由于美国在台湾有军事顾问，并且在该地区有军事资产，如果入侵成功，这些资产需要在战争的第一阶段被中和，这将触发北约宪章第五条。在这种情况下，中国将发现自己与32个北约国家处于战争状态——更不用说那些对中国侵略行为深感担忧，但并非联盟成员的远东国家，例如日本、印度尼西亚和越南。
So, whatever the US president’s ambivalence towards Nato, the fact is that without its support, the US could face a humiliating defeat by China in a future confrontation over Taiwan. America is much stronger as part of Nato – and Trump’s advisers should be strenuously reinforcing that message.
因此，无论美国总统对北约的态度如何矛盾，事实是，没有北约的支持，美国在未来关于台湾的对抗中可能会遭受中国的一次屈辱性失败。美国作为北约的一员要强大得多——特朗普的顾问应该大力强化这一信息。
Paul Whiteley has received funding from the British Academy and the ESRC.
Paul Whiteley获得了英国学院和英国社会科学研究委员会的资助。
