Trump’s Iran Strikes Unsettle NATO’s Defense Spending Summit

ANKARA: President Donald Trump surprised NATO leaders gathered in Turkiye by launching a series of strikes on Iran late Tuesday and revoking Tehran’s license to sell oil globally. The actions derailed a summit that had been intended to highlight how alliance members are increasing defense spending and supporting Ukraine’s war against Russia.
The strikes were ordered in retaliation after three merchant vessels were hit in the Strait of Hormuz, underscoring the fragility of an interim agreement meant to end months of conflict between the two nations. Trump initiated the attacks shortly after departing a dinner hosted by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, where leaders of the alliance’s 32 member states were assembled ahead of Wednesday’s discussions on progress toward NATO’s spending goals.
Trump did not comment on the strikes that evening. It is unusual for a U.S. president to authorize military action while abroad, though former President Barack Obama did so in Libya in 2011 while traveling in Brazil.
European allies and Canada had been concerned that Trump might raise fresh objections about a U.S.–Israeli war on Iran, a conflict they had not been consulted about. Trump had demanded “loyalty” from NATO partners and called the alliance a “paper tiger” after several countries refused to grant open access to their bases for U.S. forces to attack Iran.
During a meeting with Erdogan on Tuesday, Trump said he had been testing NATO allies by asking for their support in the Iran campaign. “Italy turned us down and Germany turned us down and France turned us down,” Trump remarked. “And that’s OK. But, you know, why are we spending hundreds of billions of dollars and they’re not there for us?”

NATO leaders had been trying to show Trump how they were boosting defense
NATO summits are designed to demonstrate unity and deter potential adversaries—a resolve that is especially critical as Russia continues its war on Ukraine and concerns grow about the security of other European nations.
In an effort to appease the U.S. president, NATO Secretary‑General Mark Rutte traveled to Washington last month to tout the “Trump Trillion”—the $1.2 trillion that European allies and Canada have added to defense spending since Trump took office in 2017.
When leaders convened in Ankara, Rutte hosted a “big reveal” event to showcase the many deals planned for those funds, most of which will be spent on U.S. companies and create thousands of American jobs.
NATO diplomats and officials had hoped Trump would accept the gains, but his remarks since arriving in Turkiye suggest further criticism lies ahead.
Trump reignited the long‑standing dispute over Greenland on the summit’s eve, insisting that the United States should control the semiautonomous island rather than NATO ally Denmark. NATO’s founding principle is that members will defend each other’s territory, not threaten to seize it.
On Wednesday, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen firmly rejected the demand, stating that “Greenland is of course not for sale.”
“We hope that all, including all allies, will respect the Greenland people’s right to self‑determination,” she said. “And we are sovereign states and we need everybody to respect our territorial integrity and our sovereignty.”
She added that Denmark is “ready to defend every inch of NATO, including our own territory” in the event of an attack and would count on allies to honor their collective defense commitments.

NATO braces for Trump’s grievances
Trump has long maintained that the United States bears more than its fair share of NATO’s defense burden. At last year’s summit, the alliance agreed to invest 5 % of members’ gross domestic product on defense—3.5 % for defense budgets and 1.5 % for infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and ports to facilitate rapid troop and equipment movement in conflict.
Rutte had asked member states ahead of this year’s meeting to submit “clear, concrete, and credible plans” to meet the organization’s defense‑spending targets.
New NATO figures released on Tuesday indicate that Slovenia, Belgium, Spain, and the Czech Republic may face pressure from the Trump administration as they struggle to reach the long‑standing 2 % GDP benchmark.
The Trump administration envisions a leaner, more lethal “NATO 3.0,” with Europe assuming primary responsibility for its own security—including Ukraine—using conventional weapons while the United States continues to provide its nuclear umbrella.
However, European allies and Canada are still seeking clarity on how deeply Trump intends to reduce U.S. troop numbers in Europe.
The Pentagon has launched a six‑month review of that presence; drawdowns could depend on how quickly European allies increase defense spending and whether they are prepared to grant greater access to their bases.

Ukraine’s Zelensky pushes for NATO entry
President Volodymyr Zelensky made a fresh appeal on Tuesday for Ukraine to be admitted to NATO, arguing that Ukrainian armed forces are highly experienced and would strengthen the alliance’s defensive capabilities.
Zelensky, who is slated to meet with Trump in Ankara on Wednesday, highlighted Ukraine’s adaptability and its capacity to strike deep inside Russian territory, including Moscow’s oil refineries and other energy targets. He asserted that Ukrainian forces are “eliminating” an average of 30,000 Russian troops each month.
Concerns have been growing among several northern, central, and eastern European countries that Russia may be preparing a hybrid assault—combining conventional warfare with tactics such as cyberattacks—on the continent as Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks to secure a victory in Ukraine.
Trump will also meet with Syrian President Ahmad Al‑Sharaa, a former insurgent who led the offensive that ousted autocrat Bashar Assad in December 2024. Despite his past as an Al‑Qaeda fighter, Al‑Sharaa has earned Trump’s backing as he works to rebuild Syria and restore its ties with the West.
Trump has repeatedly suggested that Al‑Sharaa could do a better job of rooting out Hezbollah in Lebanon than the Israeli army, prompting alarm in both Lebanon and Israel. The Syrian leader has stated that he has no interest in pursuing that objective.

Source link