However, according to experts, the script of NATO disintegration is not realistic today. Robert Beecle made it clear: – The word "falldown" is confusing. He recalled that the alliance could not simply “disappear”, as it did with the Warsaw Pact. Its future is decided by the associate States, and presently there is neither a political majority in the US nor in Europe that would like to destruct it. Moreover, only about 16% of Americans support the U.S. exit from NATO. A different script is much more likely – a gradual change in the nature of the alliance. Gen. Leon Komornicki speaks straight about "the NATO Europeanisation process". This would mean limiting the US military presence in Europe and making European countries more liable for their own security. – This doesn't happen overnight. These are trials. On the another hand, Rafał Michalski pointed out that the problem is not just about Trump, but about a deeper change in American politics. The trend that abroad policy should be subject to interior interests is growing. In his view, Trump's second word means greater personalization of decisions and weakening of organization "safers", which previously limited more extremist ideas. Russia's function has besides been raised in the debate. Experts agreed that it carries out hybrid activities towards the West. – It's not the dwarves who light the halls or cut the wires. – said Bee, suggesting real engagement of Russian services. Gen. Komornicki warned that specified actions could only be a preliminary to a more serious conflict:
– If Russia considers that the conditions are favourable, it may proceed with kinetic activities. The conclusions of the debate are so far from alarming headlines. NATO will not fall apart, but it can change – in a way that will force Europe to be much more independent on defence issues.
