By David Crowe
London: There is no mistaking the success of US President Donald Trump over the past six days in getting his way with allies and enemies.
Trump ordered a powerful demonstration of American military might against Iran, called out Israel and Iran over their continuing war, and extracted a big pledge from European leaders on defence spending.
Flattery will get you everywhere: President Donald Trump and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte at the plenary session.Credit: AP
Trump even drew gushing praise from NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, who likened the president to a father who needed to deliver a tough message.
“Sometimes Daddy needs to use strong language,” Rutte quipped when asked about Trump’s declaration that Israel and Iran did not know “what the f---” they were doing when they breached a supposed ceasefire.
That quip came one day after Trump leaked a private message from Rutte that heaped praise on the president for his strike against Iran and his hard talk with Europe about defence.
Trump seemed to win the defence dispute with Europe after years of complaining that NATO members were spending too little and relying on the US too much. All the major European leaders seemed to give him exactly what he wanted.
But the superficial success does not foreshadow a strategic advance for Trump and America. It takes more than six days to be confident of that.
The chief reason the major European powers are spending more on defence is to deter Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin, the world leader Trump seems most anxious to appease.
And they are doing more to defend their citizens because Trump so often equivocates on Article 5 of the NATO treaty, which is meant to ensure that all members come to the defence of another when it is under attack.
So while they look like they are eager to work with Trump, they are also taking out insurance against him.
Nuclear realignment
The glaring proof is in the realignment of nuclear deterrence in Europe. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has chosen to buy F-35 fighter aircraft equipped with nuclear bombs to deter Russia or other adversaries. French President Emmanuel Macron has opened a discussion about extending his nation’s “nuclear umbrella” to offer security to neighbours such as Germany.
The UK is set to buy more American F-35 jets capable of firing nuclear weapons.Credit: AP
These are not decisions to advance American strength. They are decisions aimed at safeguarding against American weakness.
Macron summed up the doubts about Trump with a sharp line at NATO.
“We can’t say to each other, among allies, we need to spend more … and wage trade war against one another,” he said. “It makes no sense.”
The Australian debate about defence is certain to be shaped by the outcome at NATO in the Netherlands.
It is important to look at the fine print of the NATO outcome because the target for core defence spending is 3.5 per cent of GDP by 2035.
Another 1.5 per cent is meant to be spent on related infrastructure, but this is vague and could include nation-building projects that might help defend a country in some way.
A comparison with Australia, then, would have to include all outlays remotely linked to national security, including cybersecurity and infrastructure.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and his government are on course to increase defence spending to 2.3 per cent by 2033, using a relatively narrow definition compared with the NATO target. Albanese deflects questions about lifting this to 3.5 per cent – the goal US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth set for Australia on June 1.
Fresh from their success at NATO in The Hague, Trump and Hegseth will no doubt step up their demands on Australia to increase spending. The obvious scenario is to link this to the AUKUS agreement when the US review of the pact, being conducted by defence official Elbridge Colby, is finished in the next few weeks. The likely message to Australia will be to contribute more to building new submarines.
Albanese, in other words, is about to go through the same dance with Trump as the European leaders. Will he choose to follow Starmer, a like-minded prime minister, in making a big commitment to more military hardware? Or will he balk at higher spending, like Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez?
On this, the lesson from NATO is also clear. Trump threatened Spain with higher tariffs at the end of the summit because it would not meet the 5 per cent target.
“We’re negotiating with Spain on a trade deal,” he said. “We’re going to make them pay twice as much. And I’m actually serious about that.”
Keeping Trump happy
Grand strategy or extortion? Trump blurs the lines.
The argument about defence spending is often simplified in Australia as a choice between satisfying or defying Trump, triggering the repeated demand from the Coalition to give the president what he wants. As if keeping Trump happy is a national objective. The outcome at NATO shows the decisions are really about depending less on an unpredictable president.
Fears that President Vladimir Putin has designs on further Russian expansion are driving big decisions on defence.Credit: AP
If there is a case for higher defence spending, it is not that Australia needs to prove to Trump that it is a reliable ally. It is Australia that needs to acknowledge that Trump is an unreliable one.
Does any of this make the West stronger? The formal outcome at NATO offered a united pledge on mammoth spending, but the friction in the pact remains.
“We’re with them all the way,” Trump said of the NATO allies before he flew out. But he cannot dispel the doubt about whether he means it. And Europe has to plan for a world of doubt.
Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What in the World newsletter.