10
Loading video...
By Shane Croucher
Senior Editor
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
In his first term as president, Donald Trump had a testy relationship with NATO, suggesting he could pull the U.S. out of the defensive alliance unless all member states started meeting the spending target. Now, after his election win, Trump is coming back.
NATO, set up in the aftermath of WWII and at the dawn of the Cold War to counter the Soviet Union, requires members to spend at least 2 percent of GDP on defense.
Yet, only a handful were doing so at the time of Trump's criticism—a long-running concern of successive U.S. administrations—with NATO instead leaning disproportionately heavily on American military might.
Read More on Politics
Since then, and in the context of Russia's full invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the vast majority NATO member states are now meeting the 2 percent target. But Trump has still repeated his sharp criticisms of NATO.
Recounting his NATO summit discussions, Trump told a South Carolina rally in February 2024 that the alliance "was busted until I came along".
"I said: Everybody's gotta pay. They said: Well, if we don't pay, are you still going to protect us? I said: Absolutely not. They couldn't believe the answer," Trump said.
...
He recalled a president of a NATO country asking him if the U.S. would still protect them in the event of a Russian attack, even if they weren't meeting the spending requirement.
"No, I would not protect you," Trump told the rally. "In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay."
Jens Stoltenberg, the then NATO general secretary, said at the time that Trump's comment "undermines all of our security," though he added that, regardless of the election outcome, he expected the U.S. "will remain a strong and committed NATO ally."
Trump may well have other plans for NATO. A Politico report in July said Trump's team was considering how to push European states towards restructuring NATO in a way he prefers. That sets the stage for a potential conflict—and maybe more threats to quit.
So, will Trump pull the U.S. out of NATO during the second leg of his presidency? Newsweek asked the question of international relations and security experts. This is what they said:
Stephen M. Walt, Robert and Renee Belfer Professor of International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
To be perfectly blunt, no one knows. He has no deep commitment to NATO and he has long argued that Europe should do much more to defend itself.
But he may prefer to stay in NATO in order to have influence over its policies, while constantly complaining about what the Europeans are doing and using the threat of withdrawal to coerce them on both economic and security matters.
James Carafano, Senior Counselor to the President and E.W. Richardson Fellow, The Heritage Foundation
The number one guiding factor of Trump's foreign policy is what is in America's interest. There is no scenario where America is better off without a strong NATO and a free and independent Ukraine. He will seek both.
Fabrice Pothier, CEO, Rasmussen Global
The reality is that Europe has stepped up significantly since Trump's first term. Twenty-three allies now hit the 2 percent target—and almost everyone else now has a plan to get there.
But Trump is right when he says that Europe needs to pay its fair share for European security, and we will need to show him that we are prepared to shoulder a greater burden.
Ukraine and our capacity to provide for its defense is a litmus test of a new transatlantic burden sharing.
Barry R. Posen, Ford International Professor of Political Science, MIT
President-elect Trump will make new demands on NATO members for contributions to the common defense. It is his view that the U.S. provides a disproportionate share of the resources that go to defend the alliance, a view that is founded on fact.
In his view, the U.S. has many uses for its resources, and allies who are economically capable of defending themselves, or making bigger contributions, should do so, freeing U.S. resources for other challenges.
The allies will need to engage in adroit diplomacy to change Trump's mind, and rapid reshuffling of their national budgets to find additional military resources if they hope to save the alliance.
The allies so prefer NATO to self-reliance that I expect them to make these efforts. One thing to look for is huge new European orders for weaponry from U.S. defense companies, the kind of thing that the new president would love.
Dr. Jamie Shea, Associate Fellow, International Security Programme, Chatham House
No. The U.S. is too deeply entangled in NATO and bases in Europe support U.S. operations and deployments to the Middle East and Asia. Also, the extra money that allies are spending on defense goes largely to U.S. defense contractors.
There is widespread support for NATO among Republicans, but Trump will demand that allies be real allies and meet their defense spending commitments.
He will probably insist that the NATO defense spending target be raised to 3 percent at the next NATO summit in The Hague next June.
Charles Kupchan, Senior Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations
I do not expect Trump to withdraw from NATO. I doubt he wants to be remembered as the U.S. president who dismantled the Western Alliance.
Russian aggression against Ukraine and the continuing threat Moscow poses to European stability, even if Trump is able to help end the war in Ukraine, provides ample reason to keep U.S. forces in Europe.
Trump will keep pressing allies to spend more on defense, but I don't expect him to cut and run.
Heather A. Conley, Senior Advisor, German Marshall Fund
It is unclear what Mr. Trump would decide to do regarding NATO.
He views NATO members' increase in defense spending as his personal policy success but, should he again decide to make a significant reduction in U.S. military presence and capabilities in Europe, Russia and China would press their advantage against the U.S. and allies in Europe and the Indo-Pacific.
U.S. allies likely would succumb to Beijing's and Moscow's demands, representing a systemic policy failure for a future Trump administration at the beginning of its tenure far exceeding the U.S. policy failure in Afghanistan.
Much is at stake at the moment and Ukraine, NATO and the international system are all intertwined.
Kori Schake, Senior Fellow and Director of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies, AEI
I doubt President Trump will withdraw from NATO; what he's been saying is that he expects fairer burden-sharing and is willing to drive a hard bargain with allies to get them to do more. But his public statements might well tempt Russia or other adversaries to test our NATO commitments.
Professor Mark Webber, Department of Political Science and International Studies, University of Birmingham, U.K.
No. Trump leaving NATO is based on a few isolated comments and unreliable memoirs (Bolton) from Trump's first term.
Trump will inject a lot of uncertainty into NATO—he has questioned whether the U.S. will uphold the collective defense provisions of the NATO treaty, but he has not in the campaign said much at all about the Alliance and he has certainly not pledged to leave it.
The U.S. has a lot more to lose by withdrawing from NATO than from the Paris Agreement on climate change, for instance. I think the U.S. will pressure the Europeans (and Canadians) to do more, but not to the point of threatening to leave.
Leaving also requires a formal denunciation of the North Atlantic Treaty—it is open to debate whether the US president can do this or whether it is a Senate prerogative—so, even if Trump wanted to leave NATO it would not be quick.
That said, if he wanted to make trouble, he could just ignore the treaty and row back US commitments to its European NATO allies (bring home some of the 100,000 U.S. troops in Europe; withdraw U.S. personnel from NATO commands; curtail U.S. financial commitments to NATO common budgets etc).
Even then, U.S. bilateral commitments to key allies—the U.K., Poland, Germany—would remain.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines