[soron]

"However, Pesco will invariably become a tool to defend European interests, when and if the interests of Europe and America diverge. "

It's not a question of if and when. European and US interest have openly been diverging ever since the end of the Cold War, which was the big unifying interest of them both. But apart from that ?
I do not buy into the tale of the benevolent American. The US have always followed their own agenda against Europe, starting with a war against a totally unprepared Spain (which miraculously ended with the US basically snatching up former Spanish colonies all around the world), over WW1 and WW2 until Suez (where the US basically stared down their wartime allies Britain and France) and the Falkland War (where the US left their ally Britain - special relations or no - without any support, because Monroe doctrine - which still is sort of in effect today).

So from my point of view it was merely a matter of time until we see increased US antagonism towards Europe.
As for NATO - if I tried to answer the question "would America risk a nuclear war with Russia today in favour of some Europeans" ... I simply have to come to the conclusion that we can not rely on the US any longer. Europe will have to deal with threats on it's own. That's a good thing too. It means to go to war for a reason only, instead of chasing down Saddam's WMDs or something similarly questionable.

[One Degree]

"However, Pesco will invariably become a tool to defend European interests, when and if the interests of Europe and America diverge. "

It's not a question of if and when. European and US interest have openly been diverging ever since the end of the Cold War, which was the big unifying interest of them both. But apart from that ?
I do not buy into the tale of the benevolent American. The US have always followed their own agenda against Europe, starting with a war against a totally unprepared Spain (which miraculously ended with the US basically snatching up former Spanish colonies all around the world), over WW1 and WW2 until Suez (where the US basically stared down their wartime allies Britain and France) and the Falkland War (where the US left their ally Britain - special relations or no - without any support, because Monroe doctrine - which still is sort of in effect today).

So from my point of view it was merely a matter of time until we see increased US antagonism towards Europe.
As for NATO - if I tried to answer the question "would America risk a nuclear war with Russia today in favour of some Europeans" ... I simply have to come to the conclusion that we can not rely on the US any longer. Europe will have to deal with threats on it's own. That's a good thing too. It means to go to war for a reason only, instead of chasing down Saddam's WMDs or something similarly questionable.

Basically agree with your post. The Monroe Doctrine is still very real, but liberalism required it be shoved in a dark corner. I do not see America abandoning Europe, but Europe has been in the process of Abandoning America for decades. Being anti American has been the ‘in thing’ for quite awhile.
Regardless, we are on a path of returning to nationalism simply due to the pressure of over population. All the other reasons for our divergence are just symptoms of this problem.