NATO's Future Uncertain: Trump's Influence at the Hague Summit. Seventy-five years after its founding, and despite its crucial role in preventing European wars and countering Soviet and Russian aggression, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's future hangs in the balance, potentially decided by Donald Trump's actions at this week's summit in The Hague. With a history of threatening withdrawal and now surrounded by loyalists, concerns are high among NATO allies. This shortened summit, strategically scheduled to minimize Trump's influence, highlights the precarious situation facing the alliance amidst the ongoing Ukraine conflict
Donald Trump's NATO stance: Will the former president again threaten US withdrawal from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization at this week's crucial summit? Trump's history of threatening NATO withdrawal, both during his first term and his planned 2020 reelection campaign, casts a shadow over the meeting. With a loyalist team now surrounding him, the risk of a US exit is higher than ever, leaving NATO leaders scrambling to mitigate the potential chaos
Unlike his first term, when advisors tempered his foreign policy impulses, Donald Trump now faces a loyalist inner circle. This shift raises serious concerns about his potential actions regarding NATO, particularly his previously stated intentions to withdraw the US from the alliance. The absence of moderating voices significantly increases the risk of unpredictable and potentially destabilizing decisions
Former National Security Advisor John Bolton warns of potential US withdrawal from NATO: Trump's unpredictable nature and lack of countervailing voices raise concerns about a potential NATO exit during the upcoming North Atlantic Council meeting. Analysts fear chaos and scramble to mitigate the risk of a Trump-led withdrawal from the alliance, highlighting the precarious future of NATO under a potentially disruptive US presidency
NATO Summit 2024: Trump's Potential Impact and the Alliance's Contingency Plans. With Donald Trump's unpredictable stance on NATO, European leaders are taking proactive steps to mitigate potential disruption at this crucial summit, focusing on minimizing his influence and ensuring a productive meeting amidst the ongoing Ukraine conflict and Russia's aggression. Concerns over a US withdrawal, fueled by Trump's past rhetoric and actions, have prompted a shortened summit schedule and strategic planning to "Trump-proof" the event
NATO Summit 2024: Trump's Presence Casts Shadow on Crucial Meeting. To mitigate potential disruption from Donald Trump, the usually multi-day NATO summit has been shortened to a Tuesday evening dinner and a Wednesday morning Atlantic Council meeting. Organizers even invited Trump to play golf on Tuesday, hoping to keep him away from the main event and prevent potential conflicts with other world leaders. The move highlights the significant uncertainty surrounding Trump's influence on the future of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NATO's future hangs in the balance as Donald Trump's potential NATO withdrawal overshadows the ongoing Ukraine conflict. The summit, shortened to minimize Trump's influence, may avoid formally condemning Russia's atrocities due to fears of alienating the former president, who previously criticized the expulsion of Russia from G7. This, despite the brutal ongoing slaughter of Ukrainian civilians by Vladimir Putin
Following Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine, the country was expelled from the G8. This historical context underscores the ongoing tensions between Russia and the West, impacting the current NATO summit
NATO Summit 2024: A Trump Wildcard Threatens Alliance Unity. Analysts predict a low-key summit, with preemptive measures taken to mitigate potential disruptions from Donald Trump, whose unpredictable stance on NATO's future remains a major concern. Key agenda items, including a Russia strategy, have reportedly been addressed beforehand to prevent further conflict
Trump's NATO actions: Saturday's Iran bombing, coupled with his dismissal of European diplomatic efforts, further strained already fragile US-NATO relations. His claim that Iran prefers direct US engagement over European mediation raises serious questions about his commitment to the alliance, particularly given his past threats of withdrawal
Following a Geneva meeting, the UK, France, and Germany issued a joint statement confirming their discussions with Iranian negotiators
Before the recent military strikes, key allies received notification but were not consulted. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot explicitly denied French involvement, stating, "France was neither involved in these strikes nor in their planning
Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute revealed that annual NATO summits aren't mandated by the alliance's charter. He suggested postponing summits during Trump's presidency to avoid potential disruptions, highlighting the unpredictable impact of the former president's policies on the organization
Trump's NATO Summit Gamble: Can Allies Prevent a US Withdrawal? Despite efforts to mitigate the risk, the unpredictable nature of Donald Trump's actions casts a shadow over the NATO summit. Experts warn that while the likelihood of a US withdrawal can be reduced, it cannot be eliminated entirely, leaving the future of the alliance hanging in the balance
NATO's Article 5: The Mutual Defense Clause—Triggered Only Once. In its 76-year history, NATO's crucial mutual defense clause, Article 5, has been invoked just once: in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This triggered a significant allied military response in Afghanistan, highlighting the alliance's commitment to collective security
Denmark’s ambassador to the United States made that point at his country’s “Constitution Day” celebration in Washington early this month, reminding guests of the 44 Danish troops who died in Afghanistan as a consequence of Denmark fulfilling its treaty obligation to help a fellow NATO member that had been attacked.
Trump, though, has and continues to ignore this history as he paints NATO not as an alliance, but rather a mob-style protection racket.
Other NATO members, in his view, pay the United States for military protection. What’s more, he claims, these countries have been “delinquent” in their payments and therefore should not get any U.S. aid in the event they are attacked.
“No, I would not protect you. In fact I would encourage them (Russia) to do whatever the hell they want,” Trump bragged at a campaign rally last year — repeating a sentiment he has expressed many times before and since.
In reality, every NATO member is expected to maintain a military using equipment and systems that allow it to cooperate with other members in a joint defense, should the need arise. In 2014, after Russia’s first Ukraine invasion, NATO members — at Obama’s urging — agreed to increase their defense spending to at least 2% of their respective gross domestic products over the coming 10 years.
Bolton said Trump had this explained to him many times, but that he nevertheless continued to claim that his own theory was correct. NATO does collect dues for its relatively small “common fund” for administrative costs including the headquarters in Brussels, and Bolton said he worked to lower the U.S. share and increase that paid by others — as a way to let Trump claim victory and move on.
“After I succeeded in doing that, he forgot about it. He’s never mentioned it since,” Bolton said.
What Trump has demonstrated many times since is his antagonism toward Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whom Trump unsuccessfully tried to extort into investigating then-candidate Joe Biden in 2019, and his affinity for Putin, who helped Trump win the presidency in the first place.
Trump during a February Oval Office visit essentially blamed Ukraine for getting invaded, while he has frequently made excuses for Putin. In the days following the 2022 invasion, Trump called Putin “savvy” and “genius” for having done so.
This has led summit planners to conclude that the best path forward is to more or less ignore the largest war on the European continent since 1945 — even though NATO has since the February 2022 start of the war denounced Putin. Last year’s summit in Washington, D.C., for example, had in its concluding joint communique: “Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has shattered peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area and gravely undermined global security. Russia remains the most significant and direct threat to allies’ security.”
No such direct language is planned for this year’s statement. NATO will instead focus on a new 5% defense spending target for its members, a goal Trump is certain to support. And while Zelenskyy will be attending the Tuesday night dinner, he will not be addressing the official meeting the following morning.
“Despite what began as sort of a bolder agenda for the summit, the scope has really been narrowed,” said Lauren Speranza, who worked for former Biden Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and is now with the Center for European Policy Analysis. “I think that’s come in response to both a U.S. push to focus more on defense spending, but also a desire from allied capitals to minimize potential clashes with President Trump.”
“There’s a major war going on in Europe, and they can’t afford to mention it among leaders,” added Lute. “It’s telling, how far NATO is distorting itself to accommodate the American president.”
Even if summit planners successfully excise both Ukraine and Russia from the conversation, though, the other signatories still face a United States administration that often seems actively hostile to the alliance.
In recent testimony before Congress, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth denigrated other NATO members’ contribution to the U.S. led-war in Afghanistan.
“We also wore a patch on our shoulder that said ISAF, International Security Assistance Force. And you know what the joke was? That it stood for ‘I Saw Americans Fighting,’” Hegseth told the Senate Armed Services Committee on June 11. “You’re not a real coalition, you’re not a real alliance unless you have real defense capability and real armies.”
A day later, Hegseth at first avoided answering when asked at the House Armed Services Committee if the United States would honor its NATO treaty commitments.
“If Russia invades NATO allies, are you going to recommend to the president that we fulfill our Article 5 obligations?” asked California Democrat Salud Carbajal.
At first Hegseth dodged the question: “Well, Russia has not invaded NATO allies.” It took Carbajal several follow-ups before Hegseth finally answered that, yes, the United States still recognized Article 5.
For two decades, HuffPost has been fearless, unflinching, and relentless in pursuit of the truth. Support our mission to keep us around for the next 20 — we can’t do this without you.
We remain committed to providing you with the unflinching, fact-based journalism everyone deserves.
Thank you again for your support along the way. We’re truly grateful for readers like you! Your initial support helped get us here and bolstered our newsroom, which kept us strong during uncertain times. Now as we continue, we need your help more than ever. We hope you will join us once again.
We remain committed to providing you with the unflinching, fact-based journalism everyone deserves.
Thank you again for your support along the way. We’re truly grateful for readers like you! Your initial support helped get us here and bolstered our newsroom, which kept us strong during uncertain times. Now as we continue, we need your help more than ever. We hope you will join us once again.
Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages.
For two decades, HuffPost has been fearless, unflinching, and relentless in pursuit of the truth. Support our mission to keep us around for the next 20 — we can’t do this without you.
Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages.
Lute, who is also a retired Army general, pointed out that Hegseth, presumably at Trump’s direction, earlier this month skipped a meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, a committee that was created under Biden to coordinate military aid to Ukraine to counter Russia.
“It just shows how dysfunctional NATO is when you can’t count on American leadership,” Lute said.
Source: Original Article