NATO Summit Navigates Trump’s Presence, Commitment to Defense Spending Solidified

THE HAGUE, Netherlands — The NATO summit was designed with Donald Trump in mind, featuring a condensed schedule and a pre-established commitment to defense spending that allowed the U.S. president to come away with a sense of accomplishment.

Despite his remark suggesting that NATO’s collective defense clause could be interpreted in various ways, which caused concern prior to his arrival, Trump departed with a more favorable view of the alliance after witnessing the “love and passion” demonstrated by European NATO leaders regarding their nations during the discussions.

The attending leaders reiterated their promise to consider an attack on any single member as an attack on all, vowing to increase their defense spending to 5% of GDP by 2035, up from the current 2%.

This commitment was divided into two segments: 3.5% allocated for essential defense needs, including the military, and an additional 1.5% to bolster national resilience by enhancing infrastructure and the manufacturing sector.

A European defense official, who requested anonymity to speak candidly, revealed that a supplementary document outlines what expenditures will count toward the 1.5% goal.

However, the language in this document was softened to permit Spain, which allocates the smallest GDP share to defense among NATO members, to maintain spending below 3.5% if it fulfills the updated capability requirements established on June 5. Several leaders expressed dissatisfaction with Spain’s stance, and both Belgium and Slovakia indicated they may also face challenges in meeting the new targets.

Rutte addressed reporters on Monday, clarifying that Spain had not been granted an exemption from the spending goals but held a different interpretation of what level of spending would suffice to achieve the targets.

“I have always held Spain’s NATO contributions in high regard,” he stated. “Spain believes it can meet those targets at a rate of 2.1%. NATO is entirely confident that Spain needs to spend a total of 3.5%.»

The specifics regarding those capability requirements remain undisclosed.

Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kęstutis Budrys called for some of those details to be publicly available, highlighting Europe’s depleting ammunition and air defense reserves.

“[What NATO possesses is] already known by the Russians. So who are we trying to hide this from? Our own people?” Budrys questioned.

His Polish counterpart, Radek Sikorski, was more ambivalent.

“I’ll need to consider that. We should maintain some level of secrecy within NATO,” he remarked to The Moscow Times.

In addition to the new financial commitments, the summit also saw the introduction of a defense industrial plan aimed at boosting the defense sector throughout the alliance and generating employment.

Mark Rutte, the Secretary General, announced that this initiative would involve the production of thousands of tanks and armored vehicles, as well as millions of artillery rounds, to enhance stockpiles aimed at deterring potential Russian aggression.

He further mentioned a planned fivefold enhancement of air defense capabilities.

Numerous European nations have deconstructed their stocks by supplying missile systems and ammunition to Ukraine, which has had to exhaust these resources in its defense against nightly missile and drone strikes from Russia.

The gaps created from these donations are costly and time-consuming to replenish, especially given the existing supply chain challenges faced by manufacturers.

In a press conference following the summit, Trump showed support for sending additional Patriot missile systems to Ukraine.

“We will see if we can provide some. They are quite challenging to acquire. We need them too, as we are supplying them to Israel where they have proven very effective,” he noted.

However, the U.S. president provided no specifics regarding Washington’s assistance to Ukraine.

“We’ll see what unfolds,” he responded when asked if the U.S. would increase the $8 billion pledged by NATO members for the year.

Both Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky expressed positive views about their private meeting on Wednesday, with Trump noting that the Ukrainian president “couldn’t have been nicer,” while Zelensky characterized their conversation as “good” and “substantive.”

Although Zelensky mentioned discussions regarding Ukraine acquiring U.S. air defense systems, Trump vaguely said he would «see if we can make some available,» while also stating that Washington is supplying Israel.

Unlike the past three summits since the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, the final declaration from this summit did not condemn Moscow for its actions. Furthermore, despite Rutte’s insistence that Ukraine’s aspirations for NATO membership remain “irreversible,” the statement did not refer to Kyiv’s efforts to join following Trump’s disapproval.

The European defense official rejected the notion that the softened language was intended to placate the U.S., which had sided with Moscow in February to block a UN resolution condemning Russia’s actions while supporting Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

“The focus of the summit was not on Russia. It primarily centered around NATO, our defense strategy, and our capabilities. This was our central aim, and to be honest, our only aim,” the official remarked to The Moscow Times.

Nevertheless, the looming threat of Moscow was palpable throughout the conference.

Rutte reiterated that Russia continues to pose “the most significant and immediate threat to this alliance” and referenced intelligence assessments indicating that Russia might challenge NATO’s unity by 2030.

“There is significant concern within NATO circles that in three, five, or seven years, Russia may be capable of launching a successful attack on us unless we begin investing today,” Rutte stated.

Additionally, NATO has evaluated that Russia can sustain its current military activities in Ukraine until at least 2027, according to an anonymous senior official from the alliance who spoke to the BBC’s Russian service during the summit.

John Foreman, Britain’s defense attaché in Moscow from 2019 to 2022, claimed the summit was a success because there were no significant crises or unexpected statements from Trump.

“If we compare it to last year’s summit, Trump’s presence felt like an ominous asteroid on the horizon, raising doubts about his commitment to NATO,” he shared with The Moscow Times.

For now, the answer to that concern is positive.