So much for the myth that the United States is fighting the war on terrorism alone.

Our NATO allies, most prominently the British, French, Germans, Dutch, Italians and Poles, make up half the coalition force in Afghanistan. Yet these deployments are subject to far more domestic controversy than the U.S. presence there, even as deadly terrorist attacks in London and Madrid, and many more foiled plots all over the continent, show that no amount of talk and tolerance will placate violent extremists.

At a recent meeting of NATO’s defense ministers, U.S. defense secretary Robert Gates warned that “demilitarization has gone from a blessing into a potential impediment to achieving real and lasting peace.”

While Europe’s national police and intelligence services do an excellent job of catching terrorists, its armies are not sufficient to deter state-level aggressors or shoulder a proper share of the NATO effort to fight terrorism. Even the three largest militaries in Western Europe — those of France, the U.K. and Germany — are all in questionable shape.

Many European politicians realize the need for a strong defense, but they face a variety of obstacles.

The Financial Times recently quoted a former official of the British Ministry of Defense, who stated, “The MoD today has the weakest collection of ministers, chiefs of staff and civilian leaders since the 1970s.”

Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s neglect of military affairs has only exacerbated this leadership vacuum. One bright spot is the Royal Navy, with its planned Queen Elizabeth supercarrier class and astute strategic missile submarine program; still, the next Prime Minister — Brown is domestically unpopular and may not last long — will inherit a defense establishment in great need of rebuilding.

Since the election of President Nicolas Sarkozy, France has become a strong partner in the war on terrorism. However, he faces a fitful population with extraordinarily low tolerance for combat casualties. In August, after 10 French soldiers were killed in an indecisive skirmish with the Taliban, France saw protests agitating for the removal of the country’s entire contribution to the NATO effort in Afghanistan. The French government instead chose to send more equipment to help its troops instead of retreating, with defense minister Herve Morin insisting, “we don’t have the right to lose in Afghanistan.” Despite this, the fact that there were so many calls for complete withdrawal after such a minor battle suggests many people in France are not taking the threat of terrorism seriously.

Germany’s military deficiencies are ironically due in part to conscription. Under German law, only volunteer soldiers may be deployed to foreign combat areas such as Afghanistan, so conscripts consume a substantial portion of the German defense budget without increasing its mission capability abroad. German defense minister Franz Jung insists it is the only way to affordably obtain enough recruits. However, in today’s security environment, one well-trained professional soldier in Afghanistan is more valuable than a hundred draftees grinding through nine-month service terms in Germany.

The Cold War is over, but new challenges from rogue states, instability in Eastern Europe and extremist groups such as al-Qaida mean the need for strong militaries on the continent has not ended with it. European nations must have the weight of a serious defense establishment to back up their efforts at diplomacy and to pull their weight in fighting the war on terrorism.

Reach columnist Russ Wung at opinion@uwdaily.com.