"US officials believe a strong Europe would be an increasingly independent Europe on security matters, and that's not seen as a good thing," said Ted Galen Carpenter, a foreign policy expert at the Cato Institute.

"The reality is that the United States has always wanted to dominate the transatlantic security relationship. NATO is the vehicle for doing that, because the US is the dominant power in NATO. Anything that competes with the US controlled NATO is seen as threatening the US position," he added.

But "the Clinton administration and Secretary Albright were equally suspicious of European defense initiatives and always distressed that NATO had to remain the dominant institution (...). So, the Bush administration did not invent that," Carpenter said.

In recent days, Europeans have gone out on a limb to reassure Americans, saying their plans will not compete or conflict with the Alliance's integrated military structure, which is led by a US official.

The goal, according to German Defense Minister Peter Struck, is not to set up structures parallel to those of NATO but rather to reinforce the European part of the Alliance. "This can and must be in the interest of our American friends," Struck said.

When France, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg in April proposed creating a European command for their joint military operations it is for now cast in terms of a European planning unit. An agreement recently was reached on the subject among Paris, Berlin and London.

In Washington, many analysts have spied what they see as a perfidious French plan to set up a counterbalance to US power and divide NATO members.

Early in the week, on a visit to NATO headquarters in Brussels, US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld carefully skirted public confrontation with the Europeans, refusing to weigh in on their plans. But he made no secret of his lack of faith in the idea.

"I would say anything that puts at risk that (NATO), you would have to have a very good reason for wanting to do it. I think there is no reason for something else to be competitive with NATO." Rumsfeld said Sunday in Brussels.

For Peter Singer of the Brookings Institute, "there is a clear concern of Europe sort of going too far European, in a sense as becoming something that falls outside of NATO and becomes more of an EU affair, (and) the splits in our ways of thinking what exactly are threats and how you should respond to them.

"And as these splits become more apparent, you become more concerned about these capabilities lying outside the structure where America has a voice," he added.

The US goal, Carpenter said, is boosting fall-in-line cooperation.

"What the US has always wanted really is burden sharing in the strict sense of that term. In other words, that Europeans would do more and pay more to implement policies largely determined by Washington. That's been the American definition of burden sharing almost from the beginning of NATO's existence," he said.

WAR.WIRE