Iran is ‘the elephant in the room' as NATO meets amid escalation fears
U.S. President Donald Trump late Monday announced that a ceasefire between Israel and Iran would be phased in over a 24-hour period. However, the prospect of lasting peace between Iran, the U.S. and the wider Middle East remained uncertain Tuesday, with Iran and Israel continuing to trade strikes and Trump openly voicing his frustration.
The two-day gathering at The Hague is set to focus on boosting allies' defence spending and reaffirming support for Ukraine, but is starting a day after Iran launched retaliatory missile strikes on a U.S. air base in Qatar.
Those attacks are unlikely to trigger NATO's Article 5 commitment to collective self-defence, however, experts say. That's because any NATO response to the conflict could further risk fraying the alliance.
Story continues below advertisement
'NATO doesn't really have a mandate to get involved in the Middle Eastern conflict, and they are struggling to just keep NATO hanging together,' said Andrea Charron, a political science professor and director of the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba.
'I don't think the Trump administration wants to negotiate for consensus in the protection of the U.S.'
3:30
Iran launches retaliatory missile attack on U.S. Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar
All NATO allies must agree on answering an Article 5 invocation with self-defence military actions to support a member under attack. Article 5 is the principle of collective defence: an attack against one member of the military alliance constitutes an attack against all and will spur a joint response.
To date, Article 5 has only been invoked once, after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the U.S., which led to limited NATO operations supporting American forces in the Middle East. Those operations were ultimately overshadowed by the coalition mission against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Story continues below advertisement
The current situation in the Middle East is far different, however.
What is different this time?
The Trump administration has been adamant that it is not pursuing war with Iran, and that its strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend were in support of Israel's mission — another reason why experts say NATO won't want to get involved.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
'This is not a NATO out-of-area operation whatsoever,' said Andrew Rasiulis, a former Canadian defence department official and a fellow at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute.
'The United States has not been attacked. This is Israel's problem.'
Qatar's government said Monday it successfully intercepted most of the short- and medium-range ballistic missiles launched by Iran at Al Udeid Air Base, which houses both American and Qatari troops. U.S. and Qatari officials said there were no casualties.
Story continues below advertisement
Iran said the attack matched the number of U.S. bombs dropped on its nuclear facilities and that the targeted base was outside of populated areas, suggesting Iran wanted to de-escalate.
0:42
Iran is a 'sponsor of terrorism', Carney says
Although a full-scale attack on a U.S. military base or embassy in a non-NATO country could be considered a 'highly provocative' attack on U.S. soil, Charron said, others doubted that would be enough to trigger an Article 5 invocation.
'The bases are basically like rented property,' said Christian Leuprecht, a senior fellow on defence and security at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. In the case of the attack on the Qatari base, he said it would be up to Qatar to retaliate against a violation of its sovereignty.
He also compared the current Iranian response to that in 2020 after the U.S. killed Iranian Revolutionary Guard commander Qasem Soleimani, which also did not escalate the conflict.
Story continues below advertisement
However, he noted Turkiye — which has long had tensions with Iran — also has a military base in Qatar, and 'it's not entirely a left-field question' whether it could invoke Article 5 itself if that base is attacked.
A prepared text summit statement agreed by NATO governments and seen by Reuters says: 'We reaffirm our ironclad commitment to collective defense as enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty — that an attack on one is an attack on all.'
How could Iran affect the summit?
Experts agreed that the larger question is whether the summit can be held together as the Middle East conflict evolves.
Speaking to reporters Monday, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte sidestepped questions about Iran, saying the conflict was outside NATO's territory and was not among the main topics for the summit.
Story continues below advertisement
He did say, however, that the U.S. strikes were not a violation of international law — contrasting with statements made by the leaders of NATO members France and Norway — and that Iran must never develop nuclear weapons.
'Allies have repeatedly urged Iran to meet its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty,' he said.
'This summit is about the Euro-Atlantic area, making sure that we can defend ourselves against the Russians — the really fast-reconstituting Russians.'
1:24
'All allies agree' on new NATO defence spending target, Secretary-General says
The brief summit statement will include just one reference to Russia as a threat to Euro-Atlantic security and another to allies' commitment to supporting Ukraine, Reuters reported.
NATO has called out Iran for supporting Russia's war in Ukraine, including the supplying of drones to the Russian military.
Story continues below advertisement
Iran's foreign minister met Monday with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who had offered to mediate talks between Iran and Israel for a ceasefire.
The main achievement of the NATO summit is expected to be a formal agreement among all allies to commit to a new defence spending target.
Under the new plan, countries would spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on 'core defense' — such as weapons, troops — and a further 1.5 per cent on security-related investments such as adapting roads, ports and bridges for use by military vehicles, protecting pipelines and deterring cyberattacks.
That increase, to be phased in over 10 years, would mean hundreds of billions of dollars more spending on defence.
Prime Minister Mark Carney has said Canada will meet the alliance's previous, decade-old target of two per cent of GDP by the end of this fiscal year, with over $9 billion in new investments.
That newly fast-tracked commitment was announced amid ongoing security and trade negotiations with the U.S.
Trump has called on NATO allies to boost defence spending to five per cent and criticized members who haven't met the older target. He called Canada a 'low payer' and 'just about the lowest' in comments to reporters on Friday.
0:53
Trump slams Canada for 'just about the lowest' in NATO defence spending contributions
This week's summit is being seen as a victory for Trump, and experts say he wants to be on hand in Brussels to commemorate the higher spending commitment.
Story continues below advertisement
Leuprecht said the U.S. strikes on Iran have sent just as strong a message to NATO as they did to Russia, China and the Middle East.
'Israel had to do the dirty work (in Iran) … so the Americans could fly in, drop the bomb and leave,' he said. 'That's the message to the Europeans: you're going to have to step up (and) do the dirty work in terms of deterrence. Same with Canada.
'It's also a message to Putin and Xi Jinping, though, that when American interests are at stake and America draws red lines, count on the Americans to engage.'
— with files from Reuters and The Associated Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
Trump to nominate top economic aide Stephen Miran to fill open spot on Federal Reserve board
U.S. President Donald Trump said Thursday he will nominate a top economic adviser to the Federal Reserve's board of governors for four months, temporarily filling a vacancy while continuing his search for a longer-term appointment. Mr. Trump said he has named Stephen Miran, the chair of the White House's Council of Economic Advisers, to fill a seat vacated by governor Adriana Kugler, a Biden appointee who is stepping down Friday. Mr. Miran, if approved by the Senate, will serve until January 31, 2026. The appointment is Mr. Trump's first opportunity to exert more control over the Fed, one of the few remaining independent federal agencies. Mr. Trump has relentlessly criticized the current chair, Jerome Powell, for keeping short-term interest rates unchanged, calling him 'a stubborn MORON' last week on social media. Mr. Miran has been a major defender of Mr. Trump's income-tax cuts and tariff hikes, arguing that the combination will generate enough economic growth to reduce budget deficits. He also has played down the risk of Mr. Trump's tariffs generating higher inflation, a major source of concern for Mr. Powell. Trump calls on Federal Reserve board to usurp Powell and take control of central bank The choice of Mr. Miran may heighten concerns about political influence over the Fed, which has traditionally been insulated from day-to-day politics. Fed independence is generally seen as key to ensuring that it can take difficult steps to combat inflation, such as raising interest rates, that politicians might be unwilling to take. Federal Reserve governors vote on all the central bank's interest-rate decisions, as well as its financial regulatory policies. Mr. Miran's nomination, if approved, would add a near-certain vote in support of lower interest rates. Ms. Kugler had echoed Mr. Powell's view that the Fed should keep rates unchanged and further evaluate the impact of tariffs on the economy before making any moves. Mr. Trump has said he will appoint a Fed chair who will cut interest rates, which he says will reduce the borrowing costs of the federal government's huge US$36-trillion debt pile. Mr. Trump also wants lower rates to boost moribund home sales, which have been held back partly by higher mortgage costs. Yet the Fed doesn't directly set longer-term interest rates for things like home and car purchases. At its most recent meeting last week Fed officials kept their key rate unchanged at 4.3 per cent, where it has stood after three rate cuts late last year. But two Fed governors – Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman – dissented from that decision. Both were appointed by Mr. Trump in his first term. Opinion: A scary chart shows why diminished Fed independence may outlast this administration Still, even with Mr. Miran on the board, 12 Fed officials vote on interest-rate policy and many remain concerned that Mr. Trump's sweeping tariffs could push inflation higher in the coming months. Mr. Miran could be renominated to a longer term on the Fed once his initial appointment is concluded, or replaced by another nominee. Mr. Powell's term as chair ends in May 2026. Yet, Mr. Powell could remain on the board of governors until January 2028, even after he steps down as chair. That would deny, or at least delay, an opportunity for Mr. Trump to appoint an additional policymaker to the Fed's board. As a result, one option for Mr. Trump is to appoint Mr. Powell's eventual replacement as chair to replace Ms. Kugler once the remaining four months of her term are completed. Leading candidates for that position include Kevin Warsh, a former Fed governor from 2006 to 2011 and frequent critic of Mr. Powell's chairmanship, and Kevin Hassett, another top Trump economic adviser. Another option for the White House would be to select Mr. Waller, who is already on the board, to replace Mr. Powell, and who has been widely mentioned as a candidate. Marco Casiraghi, senior economist at investment bank Evercore ISI, noted that the choice of Mr. Miran could be a positive sign for Mr. Waller, because Mr. Trump did not take the opportunity to nominate someone likely to become chair once Mr. Powell steps down. After the July jobs report was released last Friday, Mr. Miran criticized the Fed chair for not cutting benchmark interest rates, saying that Mr. Trump had been proven correct on inflation during his first term and would be again. The President has pressured Mr. Powell to cut short-term interest rates under the belief that his tariffs will not fuel higher inflationary pressures. 'What we're seeing now in real time is a repetition once again of this pattern where the president will end up having been proven right,' Mr. Miran said on MSNBC. 'And the Fed will, with a lag and probably quite too late, eventually catch up to the President's view.' Last year, Mr. Miran expressed support for some unconventional economic views in commentaries on the Fed and international economics. Last November, he proposed measures that would reduce the value of the dollar in order to boost exports, reduce imports and cut the U.S. trade deficit, a top priority for Mr. Trump. He also suggested tariffs could push U.S. trading partners, such as the European Union and Japan, to accept a cheaper dollar as part of a 'Mar-a-Lago Accord,' an echo of the Plaza Accord reached in the 1980s that lowered the dollar's value. As a fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute, Mr. Miran in March, 2024 also proposed overhauling the Fed's governance, including by making it easier for a president to fire members of its board of governors. 'The Fed's current governance has facilitated groupthink that has led to significant monetary-policy errors,' Mr. Miran wrote in a paper with Dan Katz, now a top official at the Treasury Department.
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
Letters to the editor, Aug. 20: ‘Complaints about the inconvenience caused by the Air Canada strike … inconvenience was the point'
Re 'Trump's Ukraine talks show how the global order is changing' (Aug. 19): Unsurprisingly, Donald Trump's art of the deal has been nowhere to be seen. To add insult to Ukraine's injury, a wanted war criminal was welcomed on U.S. soil akin to a normal head of state deserving of respect. Meanwhile, Russia continues its indiscriminate attacks against Ukraine's critical infrastructure and civilians. By bending to Mr. Trump's ill-considered manner of 'negotiating,' the West, including Canada, is debasing further its values and ceding international leadership to thugs. All this to say that power rules, not fairness and justice. That the United States is no longer a force for good in the world is depressing. As a middle power, Canada, sadly, cannot do much but watch with disgust. Stéphane Lefebvre PhD; former federal strategic and intelligence analyst; Ottawa In 1994, the Budapest Memorandum was signed. In exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons, Russia, the United States and Britain provided security assurances, including promises not to use force against its sovereignty and borders. But Russia walked into Crimea in 2014 and neither the U.S. nor Britain did much. There were ongoing skirmishes in the Donbas region from 2014 to 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine again. The U.S. and Britain provided some weapons, but only ever just enough to keep the fight going. It is now two decades that tiny Ukraine has been trying to force mighty Russia to leave its territory. I feel ill when hearing about the need for Ukraine to give up territory. Why? I was not surprised Russia broke its Budapest promise, but now the U.S. has as well. Is there any paper signed by an American president that is worth anything? Marilyn Dolenko Ottawa Ukraine should reduce its dependence on Western aid and move swiftly toward self-sufficiency. Bill Browder, former major investor in Russia and longtime Kremlin critic, has urged the West to empower Ukraine by seizing frozen Russian state assets. Yet the G7, controlling about US$300-billion, has agreed only to use the interest as collateral for a US$50-billion loan. I find legal and financial objections to seizing the full assets overstated. Russia's invasion is indisputably illegal, the resulting devastation undeniable. And the financial system has already absorbed the freeze with minimal disruption. If the United States retreats, European countries should seize their $200-billion-plus share and transfer it to Ukraine with full discretion to pursue a just and lasting peace. Patrick Bendin Ottawa Re 'Path to peace?' (Letters, Aug. 19): A letter-writer concludes that reparations were not imposed on Germany after the Second World War 'to create a client state for U.S. industry and to prop up an ally in the face of the Soviet Union.' George Kennan, the U.S. diplomat and architect of postwar Soviet containment policy, recognized that the war-devastated Soviet Union posed no immediate military threat, but rather would try to take advantage of devastated Western European economies to insinuate itself into that sphere. France and Italy, for example, had large communist parties ripe for Soviet influence. Hence the Marshall Plan, perhaps the most successful U.S. foreign aid program ever implemented. In this sense, Western security considerations trumped narrow U.S. economic self-interest. Kathryn Vogel Toronto Re 'Air Canada set to resume operations after flight attendants' strike ends' (Online, Aug. 19): In response to complaints about the inconvenience caused by the Air Canada strike and at the risk of dealing in the obvious: Inconvenience was the point. Craig Sims Kingston I'm from New Waterford, a coal-mining town on Cape Breton famous for unionization and its fight for workers' rights. My grandfather was a coal miner. I was lucky: I got an education and a good job with Air Canada. Many think I live a life of luxury because I travel for a living. The reality is I've missed weddings, anniversaries and most holidays. There is higher risk of some cancers because of my work environment and a lack of sleep throwing off my circadian rhythm. I'm not asking for pity. I'm grateful to Air Canada, but it's not about me. It's about the working conditions for our entire group. We cannot sacrifice our futures for expediency. As it turns out, being miles underground or up in the air are not dissimilar. The one constant is that I'm from Cape Breton, and I vow to fight the good fight. In solidarity. Blair Boudreau Toronto Once again, Canada's unwillingness to become more globally competitive within an industry punished the Canadian consumer. If some foreign airlines were able to transport travellers within the country on at least select routes to begin with, we would have seen how quickly collective agreements could be reached in the first place. Stephen Flamer Vancouver Re 'To recognize aboriginal title is not to abolish property rights, but to uphold them' (Opinion, Aug. 16): The trial judge refused to let British Columbia argue 'bona fide purchasers for value' on behalf of third-party private landholders, whose interests were thus unfairly unrepresented at trial. The Section 35-based legal concepts of 'the honour of the Crown,' 'consult and accommodate' and the sui generis Crown fiduciary duty were only developed after Section 35 was enacted in 1982. Yet the trial judge applied them retroactively to all Crown conduct going back to 1853, a long period of Canada's development as a modern nation when these legal concepts were unheard of. The city of Richmond, B.C, puts the value of its private and public municipal infrastructure at $100-billion. There are only about 8,000 citizens of the Cowichan Nation, thus raising the prospect of each one claiming windfall compensation of more than $12-million each. The above and many other reasons compel Canada, the province and Richmond to appeal this judgment. Peter Best Sudbury Re 'A land-claims ruling shakes the foundation of property rights in B.C.' (Aug. 15): 'Indigenous groups have laid claim to vast swaths of the province, including land occupied by millions of homeowners.' No doubt similar thoughts have occurred to First Nations, which might be phrased thus: 'Settler groups have laid claim to vast swaths of the province, including land occupied by millions of people.' The sanctity of title is based on the seizing of unceded traditional territory by the Crown and Hudson's Bay Company. The foundation for property rights in British Columbia, as interpreted by settler law for less than 200 years, is indeed tenuous. I find the judge correct in her ruling. I do not support the appeal by the provincial government. Charlotte Masemann Victoria Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
Trump's pledge to scrap mail-in voting could throw U.S. elections into a tailspin
U.S. President Donald Trump is threatening to ban mail-in voting ahead of the country's midterm elections — a manoeuvre that could throw the electoral system into disarray and disenfranchise millions of voters who rely on this method to cast a ballot. Trump has railed against voting by mail since he lost the 2020 election and started touting bogus claims about fraudulent ballots skewing the result. This time, he's promising an executive order that will stop the well-established practice once and for all, even as scholars say he has absolutely no authority to make a change like that given some of the constitutional realities. "This is really not a hard question — the president cannot do it. Period," Jeremy Paul, a professor at the Northeastern University School of Law who studies elections, said in an interview with CBC News. Constitution gives states control of elections Paul said Trump's promised mail-in ban is a form of "authoritarian fan fiction" that's based on "lies" designed to explain away his defeat in the COVID-era election. The country's founders anticipated a tyrannical president, he said, and that's why they gave states the power to control federal elections. However, the Supreme Court has ruled Congress can intervene when it feels like the states have gone astray, as it did with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that was meant to prevent racial discrimination in voting and after the 2000 vote-counting fracas in Florida. The founders' intentions were laid out plainly in the U.S. constitution. State legislatures will "establish the times, places, and manner of holding elections," reads the centuries-old document, which Trump has vowed to preserve, protect and defend. But Trump hasn't let seemingly insurmountable legal barriers stop him in the past. WATCH | Trump's former attorney general rejects need to investigate claims of voter fraud: Bill Barr dismisses voter fraud theories, need for Hunter Biden investigation 5 years ago Putting a wider gap between himself and U.S. President Donald Trump, Attorney General Bill Barr said at his last news conference that he has no intention of looking into conspiracy theories of widespread voter fraud or investigating Hunter Biden, son of president-elect Joe Biden. "Trump is looking out at the electoral landscape and he can tell his party is not going to do well in 2026. So, he's going to do anything he can do to disrupt the election to suit his anti-democratic agenda," Paul said. "He's trying to send a message that democracy is old hat and we're in a new world now. Hopefully, our country will not tolerate that. It's scary. If you're not scared, you're not paying attention." The long history of voting by mail Every state in the union has some form of mail-in or "absentee" voting to make it easier for citizens to cast a ballot. It's a practice that dates back to the U.S. Civil War, when former president Abraham Lincoln wanted to give soldiers away from home a say in politics. Working people, families with child-care concerns, rural dwellers and seniors are others who often turn to mail-in voting. While the practice was favoured by Democrats during the pandemic, defenders say there's no history of mail-in ballots disproportionately skewing one way or another. Twenty-eight states require no excuse to request a mail-in ballot. Eight states — including a deep red one like Utah — and the District of Columbia run their elections almost entirely by mail and have for years. In the last election, more than 46 million ballots were sent by mail — or 30 per cent of all votes cast, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. Trump handily won the election after sweeping every battleground state thanks in part to mail-in ballots, which his team promoted. Proposed changes 'inviting chaos' Unlike in Canada, where voting generally involves picking a single candidate, U.S. election ballots are often unwieldy documents. In the 2024 election, for example, Arizona's Maricopa County needed two pages to squeeze in the names of all the local, county, state and federal officials, judges and ballot measures under consideration. There were 144 elected offices, 45 judges and 76 ballot measures up for a vote in parts of that county, which includes major population centres like Phoenix and Scottsdale. It takes time to sort through that many choices — and counting such a long ballot by hand, as Trump is now demanding in his push to do away with machines by 2026, would inevitably lead to long delays in delivering results. Barbara Smith Warner, the executive director of the National Vote at Home Institute, told CBC News that such changes would be so disruptive that it would make it difficult if not impossible to have a fully functioning election in 2026. "And that is not a coincidence. It's inviting chaos," she said. "This is a straight-up attempt to disenfranchise voters. Any attempt to roll back, eliminate or limit voting at home with mail ballots is merely to silence voters." What's behind this push? Trump floated his latest promise to ditch these ballots after discussing what he called election "fraud" with Russian President Vladimir Putin — a troubling choice for a discussion about democratic reforms given what that leader has done to voting rights in his own country. Putin has orchestrated sham elections that would make even the North Koreans blush. He has jailed his political opponents, and others have died under mysterious circumstances. There hasn't been a genuine opposition party in years. "Vladimir Putin said one of the most interesting things. He said, 'Your election was rigged because you have mail-in voting,'" Trump told Fox News after his summit in Alaska late last week. "'It's impossible to have mail-in voting and have honest elections.' He said that to me. It was very tragic because we talked about 2020," Trump said, repeating his long-debunked claim that the vote was "rigged" against him. Putin tells Trump 'next time in Moscow,' no deal reached 4 days ago U.S. President Donald Trump said there's a very good chance of 'getting there' on a deal to end the war in Ukraine after his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Putin also floated the idea of Trump going to Moscow for a follow-up meeting. As a reminder, Trump's own former attorney general found no evidence of widespread fraud, a joint study from the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security found no evidence of manipulated election results and the House's bipartisan January 6 committee's final report concluded Trump engaged in a "multi-part conspiracy" to overturn the election based on false claims of fraud. Trump was later criminally charged with four felonies for trying to overturn the election. Still, in his Oval Office sit-down with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Monday, Trump called mail-in ballots "corrupt." "You can never have a real democracy with mail-in ballots, and we as a Republican Party are going to do everything possible so that we get rid of them," he said. Smith Warner says discussing these issues with Putin is just inviting Russia to interfere in the American democratic process again, as U.S. intelligence agencies and a Republican-controlled Senate committee found they did in the 2016 campaign. "Who takes advice about democracy or elections from an established authoritarian dictator," she said of Putin. "He ain't Ben Franklin." Fraud rare with mail-in ballots There are some incidents of fraud with mail-in ballots, but they are rare. A Republican campaign operative in North Carolina was busted in 2021 for alleged absentee ballot harvesting. In 1997, some Democrats in Georgia were accused of vote-buying with absentee ballots. One study, which reviewed mail-in voting over a 12-year period, found the number of fraud cases to be "infinitesimal" with 491 incidents of absentee ballot fraud reported out of the hundreds of millions of votes cast in U.S. elections between 2000 and 2012. In a report on the 2020 election, The Associated Press uncovered roughly 475 potential cases of voter fraud in the six close states it studied, including some cases of felons voting and others submitting ballots for dead people — not enough to change any result. Smith Warner says Trump's recent diatribes and revived fraud claims are just "more lies."
