Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

“Delinquent” and “obsolete:” Trump’s rhetoric threatens transatlantic stability of NATO

“Delinquent” and “obsolete:” Trump’s rhetoric threatens transatlantic stability of NATO

Unidentified Italian NATO soldiers patrol in a tank

Getty Images/Per-Anders Pettersson

WASHINGTON – Leaders representing the United States and Russia met this week to discuss an end to the war in Ukraine as European NATO leaders and the Ukrainians themselves were iced out of the negotiations despite their enormous stake in the issue. But it’s only one snub in a long line of affronts to NATO at the hands of President Donald Trump, dating back to his first term.

“NATO countries must pay MORE, the United States must pay LESS. Very Unfair!” Trump tweeted back in 2018. He accused member countries of not pulling their weight in defense spending, calling them “delinquent” and the alliance “obsolete.”


Since taking office for the second time last month, he has again singled out this issue. In a speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos just days after his inauguration, Trump demanded the alliance increase the target for defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product, more than double the current 2% guideline.

NATO introduced the 2% goal in 2014. At the time, only three of 28 member countries met that target; estimates for 2024 show 23 countries reaching it, out of 32 (four countries joined in the interim). It’s generally agreed that the jump over the last decade is likely due to several factors, including pressure applied by the Trump administration during its first term.

But even though NATO members’ defense spending is on the rise, Trump has made clear he believes it is not enough.

Why 5%?

“For a number of members of the alliance, that 5% number is eye-watering,” said Susan Colbourn, a professor at the University of Toronto whose research specializes in NATO and European security.

For reference: in 2024, the U.S. spent an estimated 3.4% of its GDP on defense – more than the 2% guideline but well short of the 5% Trump envisions.

Yet speaking to reporters after his comments in Davos, Trump declined to commit the U.S. to the 5% mark, setting up a double standard that will likely make the new 5% target a tough sell to allies.

“Nobody's going to go to 5% if we don't,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Kaine and his committee colleague Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) both acknowledged that NATO countries do need to spend more on defense, an assessment widely shared by experts.

“Increased defense spending, particularly by the non-U.S. members of the alliance, is absolutely a good investment and necessary,” said Colbourn.

Mark Rutte, the secretary general of NATO, has already indicated that defense spending must increase, and Colbourn expects the issue to be on the agenda at NATO’s June summit at The Hague.

How the additional funds should be spent remains unclear.

“You shouldn’t increase defense spending just to increase defense spending,” said Katherine Dahlstrand, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. “You should be doing so with a clear goal in mind as to where you're going to put that money. What can I spend it on?“

Dahlstrand said that much of that money should be going towards equipment, including air defense and munitions stock. Currently, NATO policy commits members to putting 20% of their defense spending towards new equipment.

The Future of NATO

“The cynical interpretation,” said Colbourn, “is that 5% is calibrated intentionally to be so high that it is impossible for the allies to meet, and then could be used as a pretext for President Trump to in some way revise or overhaul the United States participation in NATO.”

During his first term, Trump reportedly discussed pulling the U.S. out of NATO with aides on multiple occasions. The current Trump administration did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

An exit via executive order, however, is no longer an easy option. A bill passed by Congress in 2023 included a measure, introduced by Sen. Kaine and former senator and now Secretary of State Marco Rubio, requiring a two-thirds Senate majority to withdraw from NATO.

But Trump doesn’t need to officially pull the U.S. out of NATO to cause serious damage to the alliance, Colbourn said.

The backbone of NATO is Article V of its charter, the mutual self-defense clause that calls on all members to come to the aid of any one member country that is attacked.

But each time Trump threatens America’s commitment to NATO allies, for example, by questioning America’s Article V pledge or contemplating the seizure of Greenland, a territory belonging to NATO member Denmark, the damage is felt, said Colbourn.

“All of those signals and statements erode the credibility of the alliance itself,” Colbourn said. “It's ultimately based on things like trust and confidence that the core pledge at the heart of the treaty will work.”

If NATO falls apart, she said, it would put the world in “a period of considerable realignment in the overall patterns of international politics.”

With Russia’s war in Ukraine ongoing and China sizing up Taiwan, she noted parallels to the world order of the 19th century, when great powers carved up the globe into spheres of influence. The delicacy of this moment is not lost on lawmakers.

“At this critical moment, when Vladimir Putin continues to inflict his campaign, his war against democracy, we need that NATO commitment to be stronger than ever,” said Rep. Gabe Amo (D-R.I.), the vice ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

“And at the end of the day, this is about our allies,” he added. “A safe Europe means a safe America.”

Sasha Draeger-Mazer is a national security reporter for Medill News Service and studies journalism and political science at Northwestern University.

SUGGESTION: Pentagon Reportedly Pauses Plan for Mass Civilian Layoffs

Read More

Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill: Hidden Cuts, Legislative Tricks, and Who Really Pays the Price

President Donald Trump, joined by Republican lawmakers, signs the One, Big Beautiful Bill Act into law during an Independence Day military family picnic on the South Lawn of the White House on July 04, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

(Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill: Hidden Cuts, Legislative Tricks, and Who Really Pays the Price

President Donald Trump received a great Fourth of July present -- he signed his administration’s signature piece of federal legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which is a sweeping tax cut and spending package. The law makes Trump’s massive 2017 tax cuts permanent and boosts defense and border patrol funding. It attempts to offset some of these costs by making deep cuts to spending on Medicaid, food assistance programs, student loans, and clean energy programs. Depending on whose hype you listen to, the Trump tax and spend deal is either the greatest in history or it will cause the fall of Western civilization.

For the average person, it's quite challenging to understand how this law will impact their own individual situation. This was a complex piece of legislation with numerous moving parts, and the White House designers employed several legislative tactics and strategies to obscure the impact on those who would be helped or hurt. Both the Republican and Democratic sides have their own “experts” who, of course, do not agree, but even within Republican and conservative circles, there has been much disagreement over likely impacts.

Keep ReadingShow less
As Puerto Rico’s Power Grid Crumbles, Rural Medical Patients Are Turning to Rooftop Solar

Serafin Sierra Torres with his rooftop solar panels. After losing power for nine months during Hurricane Maria, Serafin and his wife, Iris, had solar panels installed with the help of Casa Pueblo.


Photo provided

As Puerto Rico’s Power Grid Crumbles, Rural Medical Patients Are Turning to Rooftop Solar

In this two-part series, Lily Carey reports on energy instability in rural Puerto Rico and its impact on residents with chronic medical conditions. Faced with limited government support, community members have begun building their own power structures from the ground up, ranging from solar microgrids to community health clinics.

In Part One, Carey reports on the lasting impacts of Hurricane Maria and how mismanagement of Puerto Rico’s electric grid in the years since has led to ongoing instability.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump
How liberals' worst-case readings of Trump actually help Trump
James Devaney/GC Images

Congress Bill Spotlight: Trump Derangement Syndrome Research Act

Trump himself has diagnosed Trump Derangement Syndrome upon Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Nancy Pelosi, Liz Cheney, Chris Christie, Robert De Niro, Jimmy Kimmel, and Bill Maher.

Context

Keep ReadingShow less
LGBTQ Refugees Came to America To Escape Discrimination. Now, They Live in Fear in the U.S.
blue and yellow abstract painting
Photo by Steve Johnson on Unsplash

LGBTQ Refugees Came to America To Escape Discrimination. Now, They Live in Fear in the U.S.

Salvadoran refugee Alberto, who is using a pseudonym out of safety concerns, did not feel secure in his own home. Being a gay man in a country known for state-sponsored violence and community rejection meant Alberto lived his life on high alert.

His family did not accept him. He says one family member physically attacked him because of his identity. He says he has been followed, harassed, and assaulted by police, accused of crimes he didn’t commit when he was studying to become a social worker. His effort to escape the rejection in his community left him, at one point, homeless and lost in a new city.

Keep ReadingShow less