Early from President Donald Trump’s second term, European leaders and many American defense and security experts expected the NATO summit this week with the prophecy.
Will Mr. Trump, who expressed his hostility and contempt for the Atlantic alliance in his first term – to contemplate the withdrawal of the United States – on his threats? Could the year 2025 be the year in which the American security blanket has drew all over Europe since World War II?
But with the NATO leaders in The Hague a two-day summit starting on Tuesday, deep concerns have been replaced by “OOF” from the satisfaction-or at least “so far, so far.”
Why did we write this
Focus a story
Despite some tensions on Iran and the disputes over Ukraine, European members of NATO believe that they can provide enough of what President Donald Trump wants to keep him committed to European alliance and security.
Nobody believes that Sunshine has replaced all the clouds hanging on a via Atlantic partnership. Now, the decision of Mr. Trump will add to attack Iranian nuclear facilities during the weekend some tension to the measures, as the procedure contradicts European preferences to a diplomatic solution on the Iranian nuclear program.
But there is a feeling that the summit will satisfy Mr. Trump enough to keep the United States at the top of the European defense, at the present time.
“This summit is organized about reducing the risks of the existential crisis on the issue of American commitment to Europe,” says Robert Hunter, the American Ambassador to NATO in the post -Cold War. “They will give Trump’s things that he can take to the house and say:” I have been bark and note what I got! “But the ghost in the banquet is still whether the President of the United States is really committed to NATO.”
Multi -party and Iran’s strikes
European questions are likely to be intensified about President Trump’s commitment to a kind of multiple parties.
Seth Jones, head of the Ministry of Defense and Security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, says that Mr. Trump’s proposal last week will stop any decision for two weeks, partly to give diplomacy an opportunity to work, was reassuring to the Europeans.
Likewise, so the president’s argument should be spent to avoid a greater war. A number of European officials said that they are reassured through administrative contacts that air strikes are aimed at making serious diplomacy possible.
“If you look at the data of a number of European leaders, they do not want an Iranian bomb,” says Dr. Jones. “So I think the president … gives diplomacy a chance and [being] Anxiety about the involvement of the United States in a war in the Middle East … helps already. “
This gathering is scheduled to confirm the procedure and steps forward in two issues at the heart of Mr. Trump’s criticism of NATO: low defensive spending by many member states, and the need for wealthy Europe to do more for its defense.
The summit will confirm the goals of the new defensive spending that exceeded 2 % of the famous GDP that he agreed in 2014. Mr. Trump in his first term indicated angrily that it was a commitment that many members had not kept.
By the end of last year, approximately twenty NATO member states achieved 22 goals, while NATO Secretary -General Mark Retty announced this month that “most of all members”, if not all of them “will reach or exceed the goal this year.
Now at the request of the Trump administration, leaders are expected to determine a new goal of 5 % of the total spending of local products on defense by 2032 – a relatively short time frame for NATO. The new goal will be divided between a 3.5 % target for basic defense spending, and 1.5 % for civil infrastructure improvements such as roads and communication systems that the army can use in emergency situations.
Some analysts describe the target of 5 % of two parts as “mysterious mathematics” that have been prepared to satisfy President Trump-while others notice that the United States currently does not meet 3.5 % of the goals of GDP, as American defense spending as a percentage of gross domestic product has decreased.
Moreover, the summit will emphasize the division of emerging labor-one of which is pressing for the Trump administration for it-Europe bears more responsibility for its defense, while the United States has increasingly turning its attention to the Asia and Pacific region.
Trump administration’s views scope
Nobody predicts that the meetings in The Hague, with the “Family Image” of traditional leaders and an opening dinner for the leaders hosted by King William Alexander and Queen Majestia from the Netherlands, will now be a love festival. European doubts about America’s long -term commitment to the coalition are going deeply, while messages from an administration divided into Europe’s national security are barely reassured.
“The big question … casts a great shadow about the summit [is] “Commitment to the United States is the United States,” says Max Bergman, director of the European, Russia and Eurasia program at the Center for Strategic Studies.
He says that the Europeans can choose the assertion of Defense Minister Beit Higseth to his colleagues in NATO earlier this year to share the burden-although Europe is more looking for its defense-or from Foreign Minister Marco Rubio says that the United States is still committed to the coalition as long as the Europeans ascend and spend more.
Finally, Mr. Bergman says, there is the perspective of Vice President JD Vance, which shocked the Europeans in February when he asked in Munich’s speech whether the United States and Europe are still participating in the same values.
“A camp … where there is a real hostility towards the NATO Alliance.”
However, most of them expect that the summit is designed to clarify Mr. Trump and the unit show will start smoothly, although there are still possible obstacles.
One is Ukraine.
President Trump operated Ukrainian President Folodimir Zellinski at the last group summit in Canada, and the two leaders are not expected to meet in The Hague. There will be no meeting at the leadership level of the NATO Council, which will be held between foreign ministers.
He is a rude comic for Mr. Zellinski, who was a star of the NATO summit last year in Washington, where President Joe Biden praised Ukraine as a European security block.
The Washington Summit declared NATO support for Ukraine. Diplomats say this year will not be mentioned until the diplomats are mentioned.
“There will be much about Ukraine,” says Court Volker, a former Ambassador of NATO who served as a special representative of Ukraine in the first Trump period. “The real issue is that the United States does not see Ukrainian security necessary for European security, and our European allies do so,” he says.
Adrian Wilde/Canadian Press/AP
He adds that Russian President Vladimir Putin prevails in Ukraine as “a major security threat to Europe and NATO”, while “the United States simply does not see this in this way.”
Did Trump committed?
Some people are concerned that the unexpected President of the United States can still raise the summit: by leaving early, as he did from the Group of Seven gathering, or by saying something that breaks the feeling of loneliness (which is one of the reasons for not specifying the date of the Secretary -General of the United States of America joint).
The prevailing feeling is that Mr. Trump cannot move away from or spoil a party that will give him the gifts he requested.
But others say that although all the micro -dances may prevent a disaster, it will also leave the main question that NATO leaders will have at the height of the mind.
“What the Europeans want to know is whether the United States is, if President Trump is completely committed to our allies in NATO,” says Ambassador Hunter. “They want to know, if Russia is doing something that can be recognized as an aggression against NATO ally, will Trump come to the defense of this ally?”
But no one will ask the question, “Because they know that there is a real danger that they will not get the correct answer.”
