Trump warns NATO as alliance set to adopt 5% of GDP defense spending goal
U.S. President Donald Trump joined a key NATO summit at The Hague on Tuesday, just hours after refusing to commit to the alliance's core collective defense promise, as allies aim to entice him with a pledge to boost defense spending.
The summit is being held as leaders look to emphasize that a military buildup is necessary for deterring Russia. NATO Secretary-GeneralMark Rutte has claimed without evidence that Russia could be ready to attack the alliance in five years.
After arriving in the Netherlands, the U.S. president was all smiles as he joined leaders and senior officials from the alliance's 31 other members for a group photo and a dinner hosted by Dutch King Willem-Alexander. But U.S. commitment concerns among members had grown over comments Trump made while en route aboard Air Force One.
Asked whether the United States remains committed to NATO's Article 5 clause, Trump told reporters: 'Depends on your definition. There are numerous definitions of Article 5. You know that, right? But I'm committed to being their friends.'
Asked to clarify, Trump said he is 'committed to saving lives.'
'I'm committed to life and safety,' he said. 'I'm going to give you an exact definition when I get there. I just don't want to do it on the back of an airplane.'
Trump also reiterated his views that NATO members must hike their defense budgets to 5% of gross domestic product — a level that not even the United States, currently at 3.4%, hits.
At the two-day summit, which kicked off Tuesday, NATO members are widely expected to reach a deal to ramp up defense-related spending to a total of 5% of GDP by 2035, with 3.5% dedicated to core needs such as troops and weapons and 1.5% to security-related investments in cybersecurity, infrastructure and other areas.
The hike would be a steep increase from NATO's current 2% target.
Spain had thrown a wrench into the mix last week, when Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez demanded an exemption from the new target. But, in an apparent bid to pave the way for a smooth summit with the notoriously mercurial Trump, Rutte appeared to acquiesce to a deal that will allow both sides to claim they got what they want by omitting a clause that specifies 'all allies' had agreed to the target.
However, it's unclear how a final statement will work, since NATO agreements require consensus among all members.
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte delivers remarks with Japanese Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya on the sidelines of the NATO summit in The Hague on Tuesday. |
AFP-JIJI
The summit results could have knock-on effects for Japan, which the U.S. has said must also meet a new 'global standard' of spending 5% of GDP on defense. Tokyo has denied that the Trump administration has directly asked it to hike its budget to that level, but Pentagon officials have told The Japan Times that the standard includes Japan.
An agreement on the figure could give more ammunition to the U.S. in its calls for Japan to make a similar move.
While Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba abruptly canceled his attendance at the summit earlier this week — part of a snub by several of NATO's Indo-Pacific partners known as the IP4 — Tokyo did send Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya in his place.
Iwaya met with Rutte on Tuesday in talks that focused on further boosting ties, as concerns over Chinese military assertiveness remain the elephant in the room.
According to a statement by Japan's Foreign Ministry, Rutte said that 'cooperation between NATO and the Indo-Pacific partners (IP4) including Japan, has become even more important as the security environment is becoming more severe.'
Iwaya, meanwhile, reiterated Japan's stance that the security of the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific is 'inseparable,' and that the Japan-NATO cooperation 'is beneficial for the security of both regions.'
Fears of a crisis akin to Russia's invasion of Ukraine have prompted some in the Indo-Pacific, particularly Japanese officials, to say that 'Ukraine today could be East Asia tomorrow' — a veiled reference to a potential conflict over democratic Taiwan. China claims the island as its own and has vowed to bring it back into the fold, by force if necessary.
While Chinese assertiveness has been a key driver of NATO's bid for stronger links to the region, alliance officials played down any role for the grouping in a scenario involving a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
'We don't intend to become a security provider for the Indo-Pacific,' a NATO official told reporters Tuesday on condition of anonymity. 'In case there's an escalating scenario in the Indo-Pacific region ... NATO would focus even more on Europe, to give space to some allies who would want to be more active in the Indo-Pacific. But it wouldn't be about NATO supporting any type of military operation in the Indo-Pacific. We don't have that mandate.'
The official also reiterated that NATO is 'no longer discussing' the issue of opening a liaison office in Tokyo, a move that had been proposed but ultimately shot down over objections from France that it would inflame tensions with China.
'We believe that we have a number of ways to enhance our liaison arrangements with Japan and other Indo-Pacific partners,' the official said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Today
2 hours ago
- Japan Today
Trump says China can buy Iranian oil, but urges it to purchase US crude
An aerial view shows a crude oil tanker at an oil terminal off Waidiao island in Zhoushan, Zhejiang province, China January 4, 2023. China Daily via REUTERS/File Photo By Timothy Gardner U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that China can continue to purchase Iranian oil after Israel and Iran agreed to a ceasefire, a move that the White House clarified did not indicate a relaxation of U.S. sanctions. "China can now continue to purchase Oil from Iran. Hopefully, they will be purchasing plenty from the U.S., also," Trump said in a post on Truth Social, just days after he ordered U.S. bombings of three Iranian nuclear sites. Trump was drawing attention to no attempts by Iran so far to close the Strait of Hormuz to oil tankers, as a closure would have been hard for China, the world's top importer of Iranian oil, a senior White House official told Reuters. "The president continues to call on China and all countries to import our state-of-the-art oil rather than import Iranian oil in violation of U.S. sanctions," the official said. After the ceasefire announcement, Trump's comments on China were another bearish signal for oil prices, which fell nearly 6% on Tuesday. Any relaxation of sanctions enforcement on Iran would mark a U.S. policy shift after Trump said in February he was re-imposing maximum pressure on Iran, aiming to drive its oil exports to zero, over its nuclear program and funding of militants across the Middle East. Trump imposed waves of Iran-related sanctions on several of China's independent "teapot" refineries and port terminal operators for purchases of Iranian oil. "President Trump's greenlight for China to keep buying Iranian oil reflects a return to lax enforcement standards," said Scott Modell, a former CIA officer, now CEO of Rapidan Energy Group. In addition to not enforcing sanctions, Trump could suspend or waive sanctions imposed by executive order or under authorities a president is granted in laws passed by Congress. Trump will likely not waive sanctions ahead of coming rounds of U.S.-Iran nuclear talks, Modell said. The measures provide leverage given Tehran's demand that any deal includes lifting them permanently. Jeremy Paner, a partner at law firm Hughes Hubbard & Reed, said if Trump chooses to suspend Iran oil-related sanctions, it would require lots of work between agencies. The U.S. Treasury would need to issue licenses, and the State Department would have to issue waivers, which require Congressional notification. Oil traders and analysts in Asia said they did not expect Trump's comments to have a near-term impact on Chinese purchases of oil from either Iran or the U.S. Iranian oil accounts for roughly 13.6% of China's oil purchases this year, with the discounted barrels providing a lifeline to margin-squeezed independent refineries. U.S. oil accounts for just 2% of China's imports, and Beijing's 10% tariffs on U.S. oil deter further purchases. PRESSURE ON CHINA China has long opposed what it has called Washington's "abuse of illegal unilateral sanctions." China's embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Trump's post. Larger purchases of Iranian oil by China and other consumers could upset U.S. ally Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil exporter. The impact of U.S. sanctions on Iran's exports, however, has been limited since Trump's first administration when he cracked down harder on Tehran. Trump has "flashed the Glock" this year with sanctions on Chinese trading companies and terminals, Modell said, referring to revealing a gun. But the results have been far more "minimum pressure" than maximum, Modell added. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce told reporters that Trump had signaled what he wanted to happen and that his administration is focused on delivering that. She would not say what the process would entail. "But clearly we are focused on making sure that (the) guiding hand of President Trump prevails and moves this government forward, so we will have to wait and see when it comes to what that ends up looking like," Bruce said. © Thomson Reuters 2025.
Yomiuri Shimbun
2 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Israel-Iran Ceasefire Agreement: Still a Long Way to Easing Tensions
Israel and Iran, which have been exchanging attacks, have agreed to a ceasefire, U.S. President Donald Trump has announced. If implemented, this would be an important step toward avoiding an all-out war between these two military powers in the Middle East. Both countries are strongly urged to exercise restraint, so as not to slide back into fighting. Trump said in a social media post that the two countries had agreed to a 'Complete and Total CEASEFIRE' and indicated that he expected the fighting would end as early as June 25. Iran's foreign minister also announced that Iran would not continue retaliating if Israel stopped its attacks. Prior to the announcement of the ceasefire, Iran launched a missile attack on Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, the largest U.S. base in the Middle East. Iran claimed the attack was in retaliation for the U.S. military's attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, but the United States and Qatar were notified in advance and no casualties were reported. By limiting the attack to a restrained one, Iran may have signaled that it did not want a further escalation in the fighting, while still saving face by having retaliated against the United States. The Israeli side also is believed to have accepted the ceasefire sought by the United States, as it has succeeded to a certain extent in destroying nuclear facilities and military bases in Iran with the support of the U.S. military. The hope is that the two countries will stop attacking each other, and the spread and intensification of warfare in the Middle East will be halted. However, while Trump was quick to announce the ceasefire, both countries were slow to express their positions. The situation does not warrant optimism, as there is no clear path toward the implementation of the ceasefire and the abandonment of Iran's nuclear development. There is no doubt that Trump led the way in this ceasefire. During an emergency meeting at the U.N. Security Council, the United States argued that the U.S. military attack on Iran constituted an exercise of the right of collective self-defense to protect its ally Israel. Although the U.N. Charter prohibits the use of force in principle, it approves of U.N. members exercising the right of self-defense as an exception. For that reason, Washington asserted that its action did not violate the charter. However, even though Iran was promoting nuclear development, may it be said that the threat was not so obvious and imminent that Israel and the United States would be forced to invoke the right of self-defense? They also did not call in advance for a resolution authorizing the use of force at the Security Council. Even if the method of wielding the U.S. military's overwhelming military power to bring the other side to its knees is temporarily effective, it will not lead to a long-term solution unless accompanied by diplomatic efforts. This could set a precedent for countries other than the United States to use the threat from another country as an excuse to use force. (From The Yomiuri Shimbun, June 25, 2025)
Japan Times
2 hours ago
- Japan Times
U.K. to reintroduce nuclear weapon-capable aircraft under NATO
Britain will reintroduce fighter jets capable of carrying atomic weapons to support NATO's nuclear mission, Prime Minister Keir Starmer's office said, as he prepares for a NATO summit Wednesday. The country will purchase 12 nuclear weapon-capable F-35A fighters, expanding the country's deterrence arsenal, which is currently limited to submarine-launched missiles. "These F35 dual-capable aircraft will herald a new era for our world-leading Royal Air Force and deter hostile threats that threaten the U.K. and our Allies," Starmer said in a statement on Tuesday. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte was quoted in the statement as saying: "I strongly welcome today's announcement," calling it "yet another robust British contribution to NATO." Downing Street described it as the "biggest strengthening of the U.K.'s nuclear posture in a generation", adding that Starmer would announce the plan at the summit on Wednesday. Since the end of the Cold War, British nuclear deterrence within the Atlantic alliance was provided solely by missiles aboard Royal Navy submarines. Heloise Fayet, a nuclear specialist at the French Institute of International Relations (IFRI), said the announcement illustrates "the continued re-nuclearization of Europe, the renewed need for nuclear weapons, and the strengthening of NATO's deterrence, in the face of an adversary, Russia." The F-35A, manufactured by U.S. company Lockheed Martin, is a variant of the F-35B already used by the United Kingdom, but which can carry nuclear warheads in addition to conventional weapons. The acquisition has been a long-standing request from the Royal Air Force. The planes are expected to be stationed at Marham Air Force Base in eastern England. 'New risks' Leaders from NATO countries are gathering in The Hague this week where they are expected to pledge that they will spend 5% of GDP on defense by 2035, under pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump. The U.K. had already committed on Monday that it would meet the spending target. London said in February that it would hike its defense budget to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 and 3% after 2029. British Defense Secretary John Healey warned on Tuesday that the U.K. faced "new nuclear risks, with other states increasing, modernizing and diversifying their nuclear arsenals." Seven NATO members, including the U.S., Germany and Italy, currently have dual-capable aircraft stored on European soil that can carry American B61 nuclear warheads — the same type that Britain is expected to use. In June, Britain announced that it would build up to 12 new attack submarines and six munitions factories as part of efforts to rearm the country in the face of "threats," particularly from Russia. The dozen nuclear-powered subs will be equipped with conventional weapons and form part of the AUKUS military alliance between the U.K., the U.S. and Australia. Starmer also confirmed that London would spend £15 billion ($20.4 billion) on its nuclear warhead program.
