Last week, British Typhoon aircraft escorted French Rafale multirole fighters in a first-ever Anglo-French airborne nuclear strike exercise, codenamed Exercise Rummy. My former boss, Donald Rumsfeld, would not have been amused; it did not include American forces. Instead, as London stated, the exercise “mark[ed] a major step forward in UK-France defence cooperation under the [2025] Northwood Declaration” to coordinate their nuclear deterrent strategies.

In fact, the joint effort was yet another indication of the increasing number of hedges on the part of what Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has termed “middle powers” against the possibility of America turning its back against its allies.

France has extended “forward deterrence” to ten European states — among them nuclear-armed Britain, with which, as the exercise demonstrated, there already exists a framework for nuclear cooperation. The French arrangement provides for joint exercises, such as the recently completed exercise with Britain; possible short-term deployment of nuclear-capable assets on allied territory and deeper consultation among them.

None of these states has openly acknowledged that their cooperation is a hedge against American refusal to implement Article Five of the NATO Treaty in the event of a Russian attack. Yet the intent is obvious. As Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere put it, “we are doing this in light of the security policy situation in Europe, including Russia’s massive rearmament, also in the nuclear domain, and that it is waging a full-scale war against another European country.”If Norway, and the other nine states were fully confident that America would come to their aid in the event of a Russian attack, why would they align themselves with a separate French nuclear deterrent?

The Europeans are not alone in expanding their hedges against an inward-looking America. On the same day as the British and French were conducting their exercise, Pakistan, Turkey, Qatar and Indonesia signed the “Badr Memorandum.”The memorandum provides for building on current military projects through joint production, technology transfer, and integrated supply chains. Although not a defense treaty, it could be a major step towards one — especially as two of the signatories, Turkey and Pakistan, recently did sign a defense treaty, the Mecca Defense Alliance, with Saudi Arabia.

The Saudis continue to suffer from Houthi attacks on their military and petroleum infrastructure. The Mecca treaty in some respects formalizes the support that both Pakistan and Turkey are already providing the Kingdom. Pakistan has aircraft and troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, whereas Turkey is furnishing planning support, logistics assistance, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance data, and support for drone and counter-drone operations.

It is noteworthy that other middle powers, both within and outside the region, are also aiding the Saudis. London announced that it would deploy Typhoon fighters to the Kingdom to help protect critical infrastructure and cities from Houthi attacks. French president Emmanuel Macron announced that France would deploy troops and air defense systems to help protect the Saudi port of Yanbu. And the Egyptian parliament approved sending military support to the Saudis.

Washington has thus far limited its aid to the Saudis, despite their entreaties for direct strikes on the Houthis. So the middle powers have stepped in, although they have limited their support to defending Saudi facilities and cities. None are likely to forget that it was they, and not the U.S., that came to the aid of the beleaguered kingdom.

As a former Pakistani prime minister once explained when I asked why it was to China, and not to the U.S., that Pakistan would first turn, he replied “the United States is a fair-weather friend, but China is an all-weather friend.”By leaving the Saudis to their own devices, Washington is not only pushing the middle powers to hedge their bets, it is also widening the door that the region has already opened to China.

This hedging on American support is not restricted to Europe and the Middle East. South Korea in particular is questioning its own previously tight relations with Washington.

President Trump’s threat of up to 300 percent tariffs on foreign companies that fail to build factories in the U.S. has been a source of friction between the two countries. Koreans also worry about the U.S. commitment to their country’s defense. It is noteworthy that more than three-fourths of the country’s population support South Korea developing its own nuclear weapons capability — a sentiment that Seoul may not be able to ignore indefinitely.

Winston Churchill famously remarked that “there is only one thing worse than fighting with allies, and that is fighting without them.”Washington should take note of Churchill’s aphorism, to forestall having the middle powers that are its allies today conclude that there is no point in remaining allies tomorrow.

Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was undersecretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy undersecretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987.