
US ‘totally committed' to Article 5, NATO chief insists on day 2 of summit
NATO chief Mark Rutte has said he is 'optimistic' that members will agree to a major boost in defence spending and stressed that Washington is 'totally committed to the alliance', on the second day of the organisation's annual summit.
Leaders of the transatlantic alliance's 32 members are meeting in the Dutch city of The Hague on Wednesday under pressure from the Trump administration to approve new targets of spending 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on defence, amid swirling questions over United States President Donald Trump's commitment to the alliance.
But, speaking before a leaders' meeting on the second and final day of the annual summit, NATO Secretary-General Rutte insisted there was no question of Washington, NATO's most powerful member, backing away from the alliance or its underlying principle of mutual defence.
'There is absolute clarity that the United States is totally committed to NATO, totally committed to Article 5,' he said, referring to the cornerstone collective defence principle enshrined in NATO's founding treaty, which holds that an attack on one member is treated as an attack on all.
'And yes, there is also an expectation, which will be fulfilled today, that the Canadians and the Europeans will speed up their spending, making sure that we are able to defend ourselves against the Russians and others,' he said.
He expected the summit to be 'transformational' for the alliance, he added.
Trump sows doubt
Trump has repeatedly complained that Washington carries too much of the military burden, and questioned whether the alliance should defend members who failed to meet its defence spending targets.
His administration has demanded that NATO allies agree to increase their defence spending to 5 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP), up from the current target of 2 percent.
Nine NATO members currently spend less than the existing 2 percent target on defence, according to NATO estimates.
En route to The Hague on Tuesday, Trump further stoked doubts over his commitment to the alliance when asked whether Washington would abide by NATO's mutual defence guarantees.
'Depends on your definition,' Trump told reporters. 'There's numerous definitions of Article 5. You know that, right? But I'm committed to being their friends.'
But speaking to journalists before the summit opened, Trump sought to reassure allies over the US committment to mutual defence, saying: 'We're with them all the way.'
Washington's 'problem with Spain'
In response to the US demands to boost defence spending , some NATO countries like Germany and the United Kingdom have already announced major new investments in their militaries, acknowledging the need to respond to the threat posed by Russia, in particular.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Tuesday that Germany would increase spending to become 'Europe's strongest conventional army', while the UK, which has already said it will meet the new spending targets, has announced the purchase of a fleet of fighter jets capable of carrying tactical nuclear missiles.
But other countries signalled their resistance to the proposed targets, which are to be met by a 2035 deadline. Spain, NATO's lowest defence spender last year, according to NATO estimates, has said it will not be able to meet the target by 2035, calling the figure 'unreasonable'.
Belgium has also indicated that it will not make the 5 percent target, while Slovakia said it reserves the right to determine its own defence expenditure, The Associated Press news agency reported.
On Tuesday, Trump singled out Spain's stance, saying: 'There's a problem with Spain. Spain is not agreeing, which is very unfair to the rest of them, frankly.'
'A more balanced NATO'
Other NATO leaders, however, expressed their full support for the alliance and the increased defence spending targets on Wednesday.
Polish President Andrzej Duda said 'Article 5 is clear … and means collective defence and there is no discussion about this article,' as he arrived at a meeting.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen told reporters that the boost to military spending was important and necessary.
'The disarmament was allowed to go on for too long,' she said.
Finnish President Alexander Stubb, whose country borders Russia, told reporters that he believed the alliance was evolving.
'I think we're witnessing the birth of a new NATO, which means a more balanced NATO, and a NATO which has more European responsibility,' he said, according to the Reuters news agency.
Hashtags

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


Al Jazeera
36 minutes ago
- Al Jazeera
Palestine Action calls UK ban 'terrifying' for civil liberties
Palestine Action calls UK ban 'terrifying' for civil liberties NewsFeed A spokesperson for UK activist group Palestine Action says the government's move to ban it is 'genuinely terrifying' for civil liberties in the UK. Video Duration 02 minutes 22 seconds 02:22 Video Duration 02 minutes 02 seconds 02:02 Video Duration 00 minutes 44 seconds 00:44 Video Duration 00 minutes 18 seconds 00:18 Video Duration 00 minutes 46 seconds 00:46 Video Duration 01 minutes 26 seconds 01:26 Video Duration 00 minutes 50 seconds 00:50


Al Jazeera
37 minutes ago
- Al Jazeera
Iran attacks overshadow NATO summit on new defence spending deal
Iran tensions overshadow NATO summit as allies agree on new defence spending NewsFeed At the NATO summit US President Trump claimed Iran's nuclear sites were 'obliterated,' contradicting a leaked US intelligence report. NATO allies have agreed to raise defence spending to 5% of GDP by 2035. Al Jazeera's James Bays reports. Video Duration 02 minutes 22 seconds 02:22 Video Duration 00 minutes 44 seconds 00:44 Video Duration 00 minutes 18 seconds 00:18 Video Duration 00 minutes 46 seconds 00:46 Video Duration 01 minutes 26 seconds 01:26 Video Duration 00 minutes 50 seconds 00:50 Video Duration 02 minutes 18 seconds 02:18


Al Jazeera
an hour ago
- Al Jazeera
US didn't destroy Iran's nuclear program: What new intelligence report says
The United States' strikes on three key Iranian nuclear sites on Sunday failed to destroy underground facilities, and set Tehran's nuclear programme back only by a few months, according to an assessment of a confidential American intelligence report. The 'top secret' document prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) – the intelligence arm of the Pentagon – and published by major US news outlets on Tuesday is at odds with President Donald Trump's claims about the strikes. Trump has insisted that the nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan were 'obliterated' by a combination of bunker busting and conventional bombs. Trump and his administration's senior officials are dismissing the intelligence report and calling out the reporting over the DIA's assessment as 'fake news'. Speaking at a NATO summit in The Hague, the US president said he believed Iran's nuclear programme was set back by decades. So, what did the DIA assessment say about US strikes? What has Iran said about the attacks? And how does the intelligence report contrast with the Trump administration's public claims? What did the DIA report say? A preliminary report prepared by the DIA noted that rather than obliterating Iran's nuclear programme, the US bombings had only set it back by a few months. Before Israel attacked Iran on June 13, US agencies had noted that if Iran rushed to assemble a nuclear weapon, it would take it about three months. The DIA's five-page report now estimates this to be delayed by less than six months, reported The New York Times. As per the early findings, the US strikes blocked the entrances to two of the facilities but did not collapse the underground facilities. The DIA report also reveals that the US agency believes that Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was moved before the strikes, which destroyed little of the nuclear material. Shortly after the US strikes on June 22, Mehdi Mohammadi, an adviser to the chairman of the Iranian parliament, claimed that the authorities had evacuated the Fordow facility in advance. 'Iran has been expecting strikes on Fordow for several days. This nuclear facility was evacuated, no irreversible damage was sustained during today's attack,' Mohammadi had said. The US president on Wednesday said he doesn't buy Iranian claims that they moved enriched uranium out of the Fordow nuclear facility. 'I believe they didn't have a chance to get anything out because they acted fast,' said Trump. 'If it would have taken two weeks, maybe, but it's very hard to remove that kind of material… and very dangerous. 'Plus, they knew we were coming,' Trump added. 'And if they know we're coming, they're not going to be down there.' CNN first reported on the DIA report, quoting unnamed officials that the US strikes' effect on all three sites – Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan – was largely restricted to aboveground structures, which were severely damaged. On Tuesday, the Trump administration told the United Nations Security Council that the US strikes had 'degraded' the Iranian facilities – short of Trump's earlier assertion that the attacks had 'obliterated' the sites. The strikes have reportedly badly damaged the electrical system at the Fordow facility. However, it was not immediately clear how long Iran could take to gain access to the underground facilities and repair these systems. On Monday, Rafael Grossi, the head of the UN nuclear watchdog IAEA, said that while 'no one, including the IAEA, is in a position to have fully assessed the underground damage at Fordow', it is expected to be 'very significant'. Two people familiar with the DIA's assessment told CNN that Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed and the centrifuges are largely 'intact'. Some analysts cautioned against drawing final conclusions. Analysts told the Reuters news agency that the extent of damage to the Fordow uranium enrichment facility would not necessarily be revealed if the assessment was based on satellite imagery. How did the US strike Iranian nuclear sites? After 10 days of fighting between Israel and Iran, the US had militarily intervened on June 22 by hitting the Iranian nuclear sites. Fordow is a highly fortified underground uranium enrichment facility reportedly buried hundreds of metres deep in the mountains in northwestern Iran. While Natanz is Iran's largest and most central enrichment complex, containing vast halls of centrifuges, some underground, Isfahan is a major nuclear research and production centre that includes a uranium conversion facility and fuel fabrication plants. The US forces dropped 14 30,000-pound (13,000kg) bunker-buster bombs, while Navy submarines are said to have coordinated strikes by cruise missiles at the Natanz and Isfahan sites. The GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) – the most powerful bunker-buster bomb in the US military arsenal weighing nearly 13,000kg (30,000lb) – was used in the strike. The US intervention was understood to be critical for the Israeli campaign against Iranian nuclear facilities, especially Fordow, due to its depth that kept it out of reach for the Israeli military. How did the DIA report contrast with Trump's claims? In March this year, the US spy chief Tulsi Gabbard had informed Congress that there was no evidence Iran was building a nuclear weapon, and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had not authorised the nuclear weapons programme that he had earlier suspended in 2003. On June 17, as Israel and Iran continued to trade ballistic missiles, Trump was returning to Washington from the G7 summit in Canada, when he snubbed his own administration, including the spy chief Gabbard, saying she and the intel agencies had gotten it 'wrong'. He claimed that Iran was 'very close' to having a nuclear weapon. On June 22, the US struck Iranian nuclear facilities. 'The strikes were a spectacular military success,' Trump said in a televised address. 'Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.' The next day, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, 'The damage to the Nuclear sites in Iran is said to be 'monumental.' The hits were hard and accurate. Great skill was shown by our military. Thank you!' On Wednesday, at the NATO summit, he reiterated his stance. 'The last thing they [Iran] want to do is enrich anything right now… They're not going to have a bomb and they're not going to enrich,' he said at The Hague. Top officials from his administration, including Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have repeated the obliteration claims since then. 'Based on everything we have seen – and I've seen it all – our bombing campaign obliterated Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons,' Hegseth said in a statement provided to Reuters. 'Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot at each target – and worked perfectly. The impact of those bombs is buried under a mountain of rubble in Iran; so anyone who says the bombs were not devastating is just trying to undermine the President and the successful mission.' How has Trump, the White House reacted? Trump spent a good amount of time letting off steam on his Truth Social platform after the DIA report dropped. 'THE NUCLEAR SITES IN IRAN ARE COMPLETELY DESTROYED! BOTH THE TIMES AND CNN ARE GETTING SLAMMED BY THE PUBLIC!' Trump wrote in all-caps, referring to the reporting by The New York Times and CNN. 'FAKE NEWS CNN, TOGETHER WITH THE FAILING NEW YORK TIMES, HAVE TEAMED UP IN AN ATTEMPT TO DEMEAN ONE OF THE MOST SUCCESSFUL MILITARY STRIKES IN HISTORY,' Trump said in a post. The US president also posted a series of apparently bizarre videos, including one of B-2 bombers taking off to a 'bomb Iran' song in the background. Trump is currently in the Netherlands, attending this week's NATO summit, and reiterated to reporters that the damage from the strikes was significant. 'I think it's been completely demolished,' he said, adding, 'Those pilots hit their targets. Those targets were obliterated, and the pilots should be given credit. 'That place is under rock. That place is demolished,' Trump responded to a question on the possibility of Iran rebuilding its nuclear program. He took further shots at CNN, saying: 'These cable networks are real losers. You're gutless losers. I say that to CNN because I watch it – I have no choice. I got to watch it. It's all garbage. It's all fake news.' He said the intelligence following the strikes in Iran was 'inconclusive'. 'The intelligence says we don't know. It could've been very severe. That's what the intelligence suggests.' 'It was very severe. There was obliteration,' he reiterated on Wednesday. The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, called the DIA assessment 'flat-out wrong' and leaked to the press 'by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community'. 'The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran's nuclear program,' she said in a statement. 'Everyone knows what happens when you drop 14 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: Total obliteration.'