The push by Washington, which also wants to scale down a peacekeeping operation in Kosovo, has become known internally as a “return to factory settings,” four diplomats told POLITICO.
IRAQ-NATO-ARMY-DIPLOMACY
Exclusive
February 19, 2026
By Victor Jack
BRUSSELS — The U.S. under Donald Trump is pushing NATO to slash many of its foreign activities including ending a key alliance mission in Iraq, four NATO diplomats told POLITICO.
The U.S. has also in recent months lobbied to scale down NATO’s peacekeeping operation in Kosovo and keep Ukraine and Indo-Pacific allies from formally participating in the alliance’s July annual summit in Ankara.
The effort reflects a White House drive to treat NATO as a strictly Euroatlantic defense pact and roll back decades of expansion into crisis management, global partnerships and values-driven initiatives that have long irritated the U.S. president and his MAGA base.
Under the drive from Washington, NATO would curtail so-called “out-of-area activities” that are beyond the alliance’s core tasks of defense and deterrence. The push has become known internally as a “return to factory settings,” the four diplomats said, all of whom were granted anonymity to speak freely on the sensitive internal matter.
The effort could see a rapid scale back of NATO’s activities in former war zones, as well as shutting out capitals including Kyiv and Canberra from formal discussions this summer.
The White House declined to comment publicly on NATO’s partnership programs and global operations when contacted by POLITICO.
The fresh details come after U.S. deputy Pentagon chief Elbridge Colby recently spelled out the administration’s thinking behind what he called “NATO 3.0.”
“Not every mission can be the top priority. Not every capability can be gold-plated,” Colby told alliance defense ministers last week, while reiterating that the U.S. was still committed to European security. “The measure of seriousness is whether European forces can fight, sustain, and prevail in the scenarios that matter most for the defense of the alliance.”
The U.S. campaign is prompting blowback from some allies.
Dropping the alliance’s overseas initiatives is “not the right approach,” said one of the four diplomats. “Partnerships are crucial to deterrence and defense.”
Since Trump returned to the White House last year, he has slashed U.S. commitments abroad, pulled troops and NATO personnel out of Europe and handed some of the alliance’s top commands to Europeans as he seeks to refocus his foreign policy around “core national security.”
Out of Iraq
NATO maintains an advisory mission aimed at strengthening Iraq’s security institutions like its police and stymying the return of the Islamic State group. The operation was set up under Trump’s first term in 2018 and repeatedly expanded since 2021, at Baghdad's request.
U.S. and French soldiers stand guard at Union III Camp in the Green Zone of the Iraqi capital Baghdad on May 22, 2025. | Ahmad al-Rubaye/AFP via Getty Images
Washington has asked allies to end the mission as early as September, the first diplomat quoted above and a second diplomat said.
Separately, the U.S. is also set to withdraw around 2,500 soldiers from Iraq under a 2024 deal with the Iraqi government, something a U.S. administration official told POLITICO is part of Trump's “commitment to ending forever wars,” while stressing that the move is happening in “close coordination” with Baghdad.
Tamer Badawi, an Iraq expert and associate fellow with the Center for Applied Research in Partnership with the Orient think tank, said the NATO mission itself is not “crucial” for the country’s security. But scrapping it alongside a U.S. pullback could empower militia groups, he said, and be “destabilizing” for the northern Kurdistan Regional Government.
The U.S. request is also facing pushback inside the alliance. “It’s not the moment to get out of Iraq … the government wants us there,” said the first diplomat.
The second diplomat said “the majority” of allies agree the Iraq mission should be scaled back but over a longer timeframe, while keeping a smaller operation in place.
Kosovo drawdown
The U.S. has also signaled it wants to wind down the NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR), according to the four diplomats, which is even more concerning for European allies, even if discussions on that remain at a very early stage.
The U.N.-authorized international peacekeeping mission, which debuted in 1999 after the Yugoslav wars, currently includes around 4,500 troops.
Engjellushe Morina, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said the mission remains “indispensable” for regional security. If NATO pulls out, it could embolden Serbian separatists in northern Kosovo, she said, creating a copycat effect among ethnic Serbs in Bosnia’s Republika Srpska region.
“We’re quite concerned” about attempts to wind down the mission, said a fifth senior NATO diplomat, since “things in the western Balkans can escalate quickly.”
Contacted by POLITICO, a NATO official speaking on behalf of the organization said there is “no timeline associated with NATO Mission Iraq ... or with KFOR,” adding: “These missions are based on need, undergo periodic review, and are adjusted as circumstances evolve.”
For now, no decision has been taken on ending either operation. All 32 allies must approve the start and end of missions, a process that typically involves jockeying and pressure campaigns from multiple allies and not just the U.S.
No extra allies
The U.S. is also pressing allies not to invite Ukraine and the alliance’s four official Indo-Pacific partners — Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea — to the formal meetings at NATO’s July summit in Ankara, the four diplomats said.
The U.S. has also signaled it wants to wind down the NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR), which is even more concerning for European allies. | Pierre Crom/Getty Images
The countries could still be invited to side events, they added, with the request partly justified as reducing the number of summit meetings.
Keeping NATO partner countries on the sidelines of the summit “would send a signal that perhaps the focus is much more on core NATO issues,” said Oana Lungescu, a former NATO spokesperson and a senior fellow at London’s Royal United Services Institute.
The official speaking for NATO said the alliance would “communicate on participation of partners at the summit in due course.”
Meanwhile, NATO staff have also proposed cutting a public forum from this year’s gathering, a side-event hosting country leaders, defense experts and government officials on various discussion panels that typically boost the visibility of the yearly summit.
The NATO official said: “NATO has chosen not to organize a Public Forum this year but will host a NATO Summit Defence Industry Forum in the margins of the Ankara Summit.”
NATO civil servants have told capitals the move is designed to cut costs amid a lack of resources. But the first and second diplomats said they believe it could also be driven indirectly by U.S. pressure, given Washington’s broader crusade to slash funding for international organizations.
Lungescu said scrapping the forum was in line with the “downgrading of the public diplomacy division,” under NATO chief Mark Rutte, who has sought to slim down and restructure the department since taking office in late 2024.
But at a time when the alliance is trying to persuade the wider public of the merits of its activities and increased defense spending, that’s “very harmful,” said a third diplomat.
“NATO has to communicate what’s happening — and what it’s going to do,” they said.
