Advisor Perspectives welcomes guest contributions. The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of Advisor Perspectives.
When we think about the U.S.–Europe relationship inside NATO today, it helps to picture a long marriage that is under strain. The recent tensions over Greenland are not a one‑off argument. Rather, they are part of a slow‑motion “divorce” in which both sides are re‑thinking how much they rely on each other. That political shift is now driving real money into European defense and infrastructure — and creating investable opportunities.
For years, the transatlantic relationship looked solid on the surface. Europeans heard American complaints about defense spending but largely assumed things would stay the same. In other words, they assumed the U.S. would always underwrite Europe’s security, and the arguments were more noise than real threat. This was the denial phase of the marriage — problems were visible, but both sides acted as if the basic arrangement could not really change.
Stage 1: Complaints (But Europe Listens)
In the first stage of a troubled marriage, one partner starts to complain that the relationship is too one‑sided. That is what we saw when President Trump began attacking NATO allies for not spending enough on defense.
Europe did not like the tone, but it got the message. Defense budgets across the continent have risen meaningfully, and governments have publicly committed to spending more on their own security. For investors, the important point is that higher defense spending in Europe is no longer a theoretical promise — it is already happening.
Stage 2: Unilateral Moves (Greenland as a Shock)
In the second stage, one partner acts unilaterally and makes big decisions without consultation. The Greenland episodes fit that pattern.
First came the idea of “buying” Greenland from Denmark. More recently, the push for broader U.S. rights and bases on the island turned a remote territory into a flashpoint between allies. For Europeans, this felt like their partner was suddenly treating part of the family home as a bargaining chip. Even though things did not escalate into a full‑blown crisis, the shock was real.
Stage 3: Doubt After ‘Reconciliation’
In many marriages, even when the couple reconciles, doubts linger. “Will this happen again? Can I rely on you?”
That is where Europe finds itself now. It still depends on the U.S. for parts of its security, and NATO remains central. But trust has been dented. When allied territory becomes part of a hard‑nosed negotiation, Europeans naturally begin to ask how stable the relationship really is. Rising defense budgets are one response; quietly planning for more independence is another.
Stage 4: Strengthening Their Own Position
In the fourth stage, the anxious partner takes practical steps to protect themselves: cleaning up finances, building their own income, making sure they could cope if the marriage ended.
Europe is doing the same in security terms. It is:
- Spending more on defense;
- Building up its own industrial and technological base; and
- Focusing on “strategic autonomy,” so it is less vulnerable to swings in U.S. politics.
Crucially, this is not only about buying more tanks and planes. To make security real, Europe must invest in the basics: roads, railways, ports, electricity grids, data networks, and secure communications. Those systems are essential both for moving troops and equipment and for keeping economies running in a more dangerous world.
Stage 5: Imagining Life After the Marriage
The final stage is mental: one partner starts to imagine life beyond the marriage and quietly makes plans in that direction.
Over time, this leads not just to preparation, but to acceptance. Europe is still formally “married” to the U.S. through NATO, but it no longer plans on the assumption that Washington will always be a predictable, generous partner. Instead, European leaders are budgeting, investing, and building their own capacities as if they will have to stand on their own feet. The divorce may never be finalized on paper, but both sides are already learning to live in a new normal.
To be sure, Europe is not leaving NATO, but it is clearly thinking about how to be stronger inside and, if needed, more independent from the U.S. Over time, that means more European‑led projects, more intra‑European cooperation, and more money staying within Europe’s own industrial and infrastructure ecosystem.
What This Means for Our Investing: Buying “More Europe”
For us as investors, this slow NATO “divorce” has a clear implication: Europe is entering a multi‑year investment cycle in security‑related infrastructure. As defense budgets rise, the spending will flow not just to weapons manufacturers, but to companies that build and run the foundations of a resilient society:
- Transport and logistics: roads, bridges, rail, and ports that can handle heavy military and commercial traffic
- Power and grids: stronger, smarter electricity networks with more redundancy and cyber protection
- Communications and data: secure networks, data centers, and cyber‑security to protect critical infrastructure.
These are largely European businesses, many of them already listed in public markets.
We have already started to “buy more Europe” in our funds with this in mind. Since our funds are prohibited from buying direct defense-related companies, our focus is on high‑quality European companies tied to defense‑adjacent infrastructure — those that stand to benefit as governments channel more money into roads, grids, and communications in response to a more dangerous world.
In other words, the same forces that are straining the political marriage across the Atlantic are also creating a long‑term opportunity set in Europe. Advisors should position clients’ capital so that it benefits from that structural shift, while staying disciplined about quality, valuation, and risk.
Monem Salam is executive vice president, director, and portfolio manager at Saturna Capital.
A message from Advisor Perspectives and VettaFi: Discover something new! Click here to register for our upcoming webcasts.
Read more articles by Monem Salam
Advisor Perspectives welcomes guest contributions. The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of Advisor Perspectives.
