NATO defense ministers convened in The Hague for an extraordinary summit. Their aim was to solidify the transatlantic alliance and make sure that the United States remains all-in. The meeting revealed the complexities of navigating obligations and expectations in an era marked by unpredictability, particularly due to former President Donald Trump’s impulsive actions.
The central purpose of the NATO summit from NATO’s standpoint was to keep the U.S. engaged in the alliance’s future. Their central, shared priority was boosting defense spending. Trump, known for his erratic approach to international relations, particularly regarding Iran, has underscored the challenge of anticipating his decisions. Like his administration’s implementation of the Iran deal, it further underscored the challenges that U.S. allies would have in trying to second-guess U.S. policy pivots.
For almost the entirety of his presidency, Trump has pressured NATO allies to increase their defense spending to 5% of their GDP. This target is the source of much contention between the member states. During the first discussion on the matter, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte underlined the urgency of this goal. He touted Trump’s vision for space-related defense initiatives. Just last week, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte hailed Trump a “vindicated visionary” for having turned NATO’s attention on the need for increased spending.
Second, he’s demonstrated brilliance on Iran, Rutte said. He was adamant that allies need to hear Trump’s demand for more military spending on the other side of the ledger.
Even with those pressures though, the unpredictability of Trump creates major hurdles. If Henry James were alive today, he would have described NATO leaders leaving the summit with the equanimity of a result. They were all too aware that the blowback from Trump’s notoriously short attention span had already whittled their original two day policy meeting agenda down to size. This unpredictability has NATO allies now scrambling to figure out their own national defense postures while totally dependent upon U.S. technology and armaments.
While NATO allies are striving to reduce their dependency on U.S. military resources, they remain cautious not to provoke a complete rupture with the United States. This equilibrium is incredibly important as they continue down their separate defense priorities and timeframes. The United Kingdom pledged to take on a 5% defense spending target by 2035. This decision emphasizes its long-term commitment to that end, even as U.S. policies keep flipping back and forth.
In public remarks at the summit, Trump was careful to restate the United States’ commitment to NATO’s Article 5 collective defense doctrine. This dangerous doctrine has become the foundation for the alliance’s political power. The impatience he is showing over issues such as Ukraine only adds to concerns about future commitments from any future U.S. leadership.
As for the fate of NATO after Trump’s successors, there is no telling. There are concerns that the next administration could either show a stronger commitment to NATO or become even more unreliable than Trump himself. This ambiguity has understandably made European allies gunshy as they suss out their defense priorities in a transatlantic framework.