
Trump heads to the NATO summit on the heels of a possible Israel-Iran ceasefire
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Donald Trump's first appearance at NATO since returning to the White House was supposed to center on how the U.S. secured a historic military spending pledge from others in the defensive alliance -- effectively bending it to its will.
But in the spotlight instead now is Trump's decision to strike three nuclear enrichment facilities in Iran that the administration says eroded Tehran's nuclear ambitions as well as the president's sudden announcement that Israel and Iran had reached a "complete and total ceasefire." The sharp U-turn in hostilities just hours before he was set to depart for the summit is sure to dominate the discussions in The Hague, Netherlands.
The impact of the strikes had already begun to shape the summit, with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte dancing around the issue even as hundreds of people showed up in The Hague on Sunday to denounce the conflict in a protest that was supposed to be focused on defense spending.
Still, other NATO countries have become accustomed to the unpredictable when it comes to Trump, who has made no secret of his disdain for the alliance, which was created as a bulwark against threats from the former Soviet Union.
Trump's debut on the NATO stage at the 2017 summit was perhaps most remembered by his shove of Dusko Markovic, the prime minister of Montenegro, as the U.S. president jostled toward the front of the pack of world leaders during a NATO headquarters tour.
And he began the 2018 summit by questioning the value of the decades-old military alliance and accusing its members of not contributing enough money for their defense -- themes he has echoed since. In Brussels, Trump floated a 4% target of defense spending as a percentage of a country's gross domestic product, a figure that seemed unthinkable at the time.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, will also attend the NATO summit this week. She said if Trump does anything to sow division within the alliance, it would benefit Xi Jinping of China, which NATO countries have accused of enabling Russia as it invades Ukraine.
"That does not help America, does not help our national security," Shaheen said in an interview. "What it does is hand a victory to our adversaries, and for an administration that claims to be so concerned about the threat from (China), to behave in that way is hard to understand."
Trump heavily telegraphed his attitude toward global alliances during his presidential campaigns.
As a candidate in 2016, Trump suggested that he as president would not necessarily heed the alliance's mutual defense guarantees outlined in Article 5 of the NATO treaty. And during a campaign rally in 2024, Trump recounted a conversation with another NATO leader during which Trump said he would "encourage" Russia "to do whatever the hell they want" to members who weren't meeting the alliance's military spending targets.
In The Hague, Trump will want to tout -- and take credit for -- the pledge to hike military spending, which requires other NATO countries to invest in their defense at an unprecedented scale.
The president went as far as to argue that the U.S. should not have to abide by the 5% spending pledge he wants imposed on the other NATO countries.
That 5% is effectively divided into two parts. The first, 3.5%, is meant to be made up of traditional military spending such as tanks, warplanes and air defense. What can comprise the remaining 1.5% is a bit fuzzier, but it can include things like roads and bridges that troops could use to travel. According to NATO, the U.S. was spending about 3.4% of its gross domestic product on defense as of 2024.
Most NATO countries -- with Spain as the key holdout -- are preparing to endorse the pledge, motivated not just by Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine to bolster their own defenses but also perhaps appease the United States and its tempestuous leader.
"He hasn't said this in a while, but there are still a lot of worries in Europe that maybe the United States will pull out of NATO, maybe the United States won't honor Article 5," said Matthew Kroenig, vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council's Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security and a former Pentagon official. "I think there is a real fear among Europeans that we need to deliver for Trump in order to keep the United States engaged in NATO."
Kroenig added: "Like it or not, I do think Trump's tougher style does get more results."
European allies have taken note of potential signs of a broader U.S. retreat. France and other NATO countries have been concerned that the Trump administration is considering reducing troop levels in Europe and shift them over to the Indo-Pacific, which Cabinet officials have signaled is a higher priority.
Still, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Matt Whitaker have underscored the U.S.' commitment and have said the Trump administration is only seeking a stronger alliance.
"There's sort of -- in some ways -- not a coherent view coming from this administration, the Trump administration, about how it sees NATO," said Max Bergmann, the director of the Europe, Russia and Eurasia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "And right now, Europeans can kind of see what they want from the United States."
The White House has not said which world leaders Trump will meet with at the World Forum in The Hague. It's unclear whether Trump's path will cross with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's; the two leaders were scheduled to meet at the Group of 7 summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, earlier this month before Trump abruptly cut his trip short and returned to Washington.
Rutte has stressed before that Trump's tariff war has no impact on NATO since the alliance doesn't deal with trade. But it will be hard to ignore the issue as the U.S. and the European Union continue to negotiate a trade deal after the U.S. president threatened 50% import taxes on all European goods.
Trump has set a July 9 deadline for the U.S. and the 27-country EU to strike a trade deal. But in recent days, he's said the EU had not offered a fair deal as he reiterated his threat to force Europe to "just pay whatever we say they have to pay."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Mainichi
2 hours ago
- The Mainichi
US strikes on Iran add to global travel disruptions and flight cancellations
NEW YORK (AP) -- The U.S. entry into Israel's war with Iran has caused travel disruptions to pile up globally. Following unprecedented bombings ordered by President Donald Trump on three Iranian nuclear and military sites over the weekend, Iran on Monday launched a missile attack on U.S. forces at Qatar's Al Udeid Air Base. Qatar had closed its airspace just hours earlier, after both the U.S. and U.K. also urged their citizens to shelter in place there. The region has been on edge following the weekend strikes from the U.S. -- and since Israel began the war with a surprise bombardment on Iran, which has responded with its own missile and drone strikes, earlier this month. As deadly attacks escalated between Israel and Iran, sections of airspace and airports throughout the region have temporarily closed. And airlines canceled more flights in recent days, with some halting select routes through the middle of the week -- particularly in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, just across the Persian Gulf from Iran. The Middle East carriers were severely affected with cancellations and delays. Qatar Airways said its flights were suspended because of the closure of air traffic in Qatar. "The airline is working closely with government stakeholders and the relevant authorities to support impacted passengers, and will resume operations when the airspace reopens," it said, while warning that delays were likely even after operations resume. Additional ground staff was sent to Hamad International Airport and other key airports to assist affected passengers, it said. Emirates suspended all flights to Iran and Iraq, including those serving Baghdad and Basra, until and including Monday 30 June 2025. An unspecified number of other Emirates flights were rerouted but continuing to operate flights as scheduled, using flight paths well distanced from conflict areas. Some flights may be delayed. Etihad Airways, the other of the two flag carriers of the United Arab Emirates, suspended all flights between Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv through 15 July, and also announced several regional flight cancellations for Monday and Tuesday, including those connecting Abu Dhabi to and from Kuwait, Doha, Dammam and muscat. Gulf Air, the carrier of the Kingdom of Bahrain, extended the cancellation of scheduled flights to Jordan and until June 27. "As the safety of its passengers and crew members remains a top priority, Gulf Air will continue to monitor developments in the region closely, and work with its partners to help accommodate and reroute passengers affected by these flight cancellations," it said. Singapore Airlines, for example, canceled some flights to and from Dubai starting Sunday and through Wednesday, citing "a security assessment of the geopolitical situation in the Middle East." And British Airways has similarly suspended flights to and from Doha through Wednesday. "Safety is always our highest priority," British Airways said in a statement confirming its cancellations to The Associated Press, adding that it "will keep the situation under review." Air India on Monday announced it was ceasing "all operations to the region as well as to and from the East Coast of North America and Europe" immediately until further notice. The airline, which is still reeling from a plane crash that killed at least 270 people earlier this month, added that India-bound flights from North America were being diverted or rerouted away from closed airspaces. Air tracking data from FlightAware showed 819 cancellations worldwide as of Tuesday. Dubai International Airport topped the list with 89 cancellations in and out of the airport as of around midnight ET. And Air India had had the highest amount of cancellations among carriers, totaling 40 around midnight ET. Such disruptions have snarled travel, particularly as central hubs in the Middle East often connect flights worldwide -- but experts stress that these kind of airspace closures and flight diversions are critical to ensuring safety, especially if future escalation emerges suddenly. "It is the responsibility of states, countries to ensure that their airspace is safe for passage of aircraft," Hassan Shahidi, president and CEO of the Flight Safety Foundation. He added that on Monday "the Qataris did the absolutely right thing to close their airspace because of the threat of conflict." Beyond Qatari airspace, Flightradar24 reported that UAE airspace was also closed on Monday. After several hours of diversions, flights appeared to be landing and taking off in the country again. Monday marks the latest "dramatic increase" in this kind of impact, said Ian Petchenik, director of communications at Flightradar24. And while the future is unknown, he added that it's important to remember airspace closures and flight cancellations reflect that "airlines, air traffic controllers and flight crews are doing their best to keep everybody safe." Shahidi adds that it's important for travelers to monitor government guidance -- such as safety notices from the U.S. State Department. How long the war lasts and what, if any, future escalation comes next could carry more widespread implications. Beyond disrupting global flight networks farther down the road, Shahidi stresses that it's very difficult for people who may need or want to evacuate countries impacted by the war to do so without access to commercial flights. At the same time, he adds, it's critical that state authorities focus on keeping their skies safe -- pointing to past tragedies of passenger flights that were shot down by strikes. That includes Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, which was shot down by Russian-backed forces while flying over Ukraine in 2014, killing 298 people. "We are all praying and urging resolution to this conflict -- and especially as it relates to protection of civilian air travel," Shahidi said. "We do not want to have an MH17, with innocent lives being lost in a missile strike ... We do not want to repeat that history."

Japan Times
2 hours ago
- Japan Times
Big questions loom over Trump's announcement of Israel-Iran ceasefire deal
When President Donald Trump sent U.S. bombers to strike Iran's nuclear sites last weekend, he was betting he could help ally Israel cripple Tehran's nuclear program while keeping his long-standing vow to avoid entanglement in a protracted war. Just days later, Trump's surprise announcement on Monday of an Israel-Iran ceasefire agreement suggests he may have bombed Tehran's rulers back to the negotiating table. But a long list of big unanswered questions remains, not least whether any ceasefire can actually hold between two bitter foes whose yearslong "shadow' conflict had erupted into an air war marked by the past 12 days of strikes on each other's territory.

Japan Times
3 hours ago
- Japan Times
NATO's Indo-Pacific ties risk losing momentum as leaders skip key summit
NATO's outreach to the Indo-Pacific risks losing momentum, analysts say, as U.S. President Donald Trump's trade and defense demands — as well as his weekend decision to strike Iranian nuclear sites — create a rift with the alliance's partners in the region. Three leaders of NATO's so-called Indo-Pacific Four (IP4) partner countries, including Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and new South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, have decided to skip a key summit that formally kicked off Tuesday. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese earlier bailed on the event, leaving New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon as the sole regional leader attending the gathering. Senior officials will fill in for the absent leaders, with Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya replacing Ishiba. Although NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte on Monday attempted to play down the absences' impact, saying he 'would not read too much into' them, the snubs have highlighted a visible shift in focus from the administration of Trump's predecessor, Joe Biden. 'The optics are poor for NATO,' said Nate Fischler, Asia-Pacific analyst at U.S.-based geopolitics and intelligence firm RANE. 'The absence of three IP4 leaders — especially after Rutte's visit to Japan earlier this year — suggests that NATO's regional outreach is losing substantial momentum under Trump's second term.' The conspicuous absences, he added, raise 'serious doubts about the coherence of the so-called global NATO vision Washington previously championed.' According to Gorana Grgic, a senior researcher in Euro-Atlantic Security at ETH Zurich's Center for Security Studies, the cancellations underscore how crucial the Biden administration was in driving cross-regional cooperation, with the wave of nonattendance suggesting 'a cooling of momentum.' U.S. President Donald Trump gestures toward the press as he greets German Chancellor Friedrich Merz upon arrival at the West Wing of the White House in Washington on June 5. | AFP-JIJI The 32-member alliance's ties with the IP4 had expanded dramatically in recent years, particularly as both sides embraced the argument that the security of the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific regions is closely interlinked. This even led to several IP4 countries, including Japan — widely seen as the closest of the partners — upgrading ties to an Individually Tailored Partnership Program in 2023. The move was interpreted as ushering in a new era with NATO. But under Trump, there has been a 'noticeable reversion to a more transactional and theater-specific view of alliances,' Grgic said, noting that key administration officials 'have made clear distinctions between European and Indo-Pacific allies' responsibilities.' What's remarkable about the cancellations is that few concrete reasons have been made public. Lee cited 'domestic priorities' and growing uncertainty in the Middle East, while Foreign Ministry officials in Tokyo pointed to 'various circumstances' when announcing Ishiba's decision. In Japan's case, experts say Ishiba's move was primarily in response to Trump's decision to strike Iran, as Tokyo seeks to avoid antagonizing either the U.S. or Iran, with which it maintains good relations. As Sebastian Maslow, an associate professor at the University of Tokyo, puts it, Ishiba's decision illustrates the tough position Japan has found itself in and its attempt to strike a balance between its traditionally close ties to the Middle East and the U.S. 'At the NATO summit, it is likely that criticism of U.S. actions would be voiced,' he said. 'This would have forced Japan to take a clear position, and so far, Ishiba has remained largely silent in response to Trump's military intervention.' Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba attends a news conference in Tokyo on Monday. | Pool / via REUTERS But there might also have been other, more pragmatic factors at play, considering that Ishiba only cancelled the trip at the last minute, with diplomatic sources telling The Japan Times that the decision came only after it emerged that Trump might not have time to attend a separate meeting with Rutte and IP4 leaders in The Hague. 'There was a likely perception among IP4 leaders that a joint meeting would either not materialize or risk resulting in political embarrassment, with little in the way of actionable strategic gains,' Fischler said. The absence of these key leaders now means that the NATO-IP4 summit is 'effectively dead on arrival this year,' he said. In addition, several IP4 leaders had considered attending the summit partially in the hope of arranging bilateral meetings with Trump to discuss pressing issues such as Washington's unilateral tariffs and its demand on Indo-Pacific allies to hike defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product — a call that has faced stronger resistance in Asia than in Europe. Trump's insistence on allies' defense spending hikes to 3.5% and potentially as high as the new 5% standard of NATO 'risks breakdown with IP4 partners,' Fischler said, particularly as both Tokyo and Canberra have already publicly rebuked the 3.5% threshold. Albanese had said Canberra would not be dictated to by its ally, noting that the country was already planning to pour a significant amount of cash into defense coffers. 'What we'll do is we'll determine our defense policy,' Albanese said June 1, noting recent investments and adding that Australia would 'continue to provide for investing in our capability but also investing in our relationships in the region.' Both Albanese and South Korea's Lee fell short in bids to meet with Trump at last week's Group of Seven summit in Canada after he left the gathering early. Observers said fears of a replay of those events, absent a firm commitment from Washington to a one-on-one meeting in the Netherlands, ultimately helped push Lee and Albanese to skip the gathering. 'After the G7 episode, where Trump's fitful participation reportedly frustrated several leaders, there is a wariness about investing political capital in uncertain or one-sided engagements,' Grgic said. A member of the Dutch army patrols ahead of the NATO summit in The Hague on Monday. | REUTERS Growing concerns among Indo-Pacific allies that the U.S. is deprioritizing the cross-regional NATO-IP4 track was also likely to have weighed heavily on leaders' minds. 'Without strong U.S. backing, the incentive for IP4 leaders to engage in a summit with limited deliverables for them is comparatively weaker than just a year ago,' Grgic added. The snubs suggest that IP4 countries may now see NATO as less of a global security forum and more as a Europe-focused alliance susceptible to U.S. domestic politics and demands. 'They still value ties with NATO, but under Trump's leadership, they are deprioritizing it as a platform for meaningful Asia-Pacific engagement,' Fischler said. 'IP4 countries will likely double down on efforts to build ties bilaterally and minilaterally among themselves and also with the Philippines.' And as NATO focuses more strongly on deterring Russia, how close ties with the IP4 can develop in the Trump era will depend on whether Washington shifts U.S. defense priorities to contain China. However, given the ongoing crisis in the Middle East, the direction of Washington's strategy is more uncertain than ever, said Maslow. This, in turn, is likely to benefit Beijing, which might see the collapse of the IP4 meeting as a window of opportunity to push the narrative that the West is fragmented and unreliable, a narrative mainly intended for audiences in Southeast Asia and the Global South. Strategic incoherence within the transatlantic alliance, particularly as it spills into Indo-Pacific policy, reduces the likelihood of coordinated pushback against China's assertiveness, Grgic said, adding that for Beijing, weakened NATO-IP4 ties and a divided U.S.-Europe front presents an opportunity to deepen its regional influence. 'In a nutshell, fractures in Western alignment provide China with more room to maneuver diplomatically, economically and militarily.'