Summary of Key Points
At the NATO summit in Ankara, Trump expressed strong dissatisfaction with his European allies:
1. He criticized them for not spending enough on defense and not supporting U.S. military actions against Iran, threatening to withdraw troops from Europe and America and cut off aid.
2. He once again raised the issue of wanting to “control Greenland,” which sparked opposition from Denmark and the EU.
The differences between the U.S. and Europe regarding defense responsibilities and geopolitical interests have intensified. European allies are beginning to reduce their reliance on the U.S. and adjust their own defense strategies, but the long-term momentum of cooperation remains, and their relationship has not completely broken down.
Detailed Analysis
1. Why is Trump so angry with NATO allies?
Trump’s dissatisfaction stems from two main issues:
- Lack of funding: NATO requires allies to spend 5% of their GDP on defense by 2035 (3.5% for core defense and 1.5% for broader security). However, European allies are falling short; by 2026, the combined spending is only expected to reach 3.93%, far from the target. Trump believes that the U.S. is spending billions to protect Europe, yet allies are unwilling to contribute adequately to their own defense, which he finds unfair.
- Lack of support: When the U.S. launched military actions against Iran and asked for help from Italy, Germany, and France, it was denied. Trump feels that while he has always supported them, they have not reciprocated, which has infuriated him to the point where he said he might not attend the summit if it were held elsewhere.
In essence, Trump views NATO as a business deal: allies must pay for protection and provide support when needed; otherwise, the U.S. will withdraw its commitment.
2. What would the withdrawal of troops from Europe and America mean?
The U.S. has 80,000 troops in Europe, which serves as a “security umbrella” against external threats like Russia and demonstrates its willingness to assist in case of an attack. Trump’s threat to withdraw all troops, along with the already announced reduction of 5,000 troops from Germany, is forcing European allies to take responsibility for their own defense. Countries like France and Germany are increasing their defense budgets (France plans to raise spending from 2% to 2.5% by 2030 without parliamentary debate), while others, such as Spain, are resisting efforts to increase spending above 2.1%. Experts suggest that NATO is shifting from a U.S.-led protection model to one where Europe assumes more responsibility.
3. Why does Trump keep talking about Greenland?
Greenland, the world’s largest island, holds significant strategic value for the U.S., as it is close to Arctic shipping lanes and rich in resources like rare earths. Trump believes Denmark is not managing the island effectively and wants to control it due to its importance for U.S. interests. However, Denmark is firmly opposed, with the Prime Minister stating that Greenland will not be sold, and hopes that allies respect Danish sovereignty. Although discussions are underway, progress is slow. Trump’s use of economic pressure (such as tariffs) has raised concerns among European allies about the implications for sovereignty.
4. Will U.S.-European relations completely break down?
The summit revealed deep tensions between the two countries on issues such as defense responsibilities, geopolitical interests (Greenland), and aid to Ukraine. European allies have realized that they cannot rely solely on the U.S. for protection and are taking steps to strengthen their own defenses. However, the historical momentum of cooperation within NATO remains, with many ties (such as military trade and intelligence sharing) that are difficult to sever. Experts predict that negotiations will continue, but trust between the U.S. and Europe will decline, leading to a more pragmatic relationship without the previous level of alliance.
Conclusion
Trump’s behavior at the NATO summit reflects his desire for Europe to increase its defense spending and assume more responsibility, while also seeking strategic benefits like Greenland. Although European allies are dissatisfied, they are beginning to prepare for a world without U.S. protection. U.S.-European relations will likely become more strained, but they will not completely collapse, as both sides still have shared interests to maintain. For ordinary people, this means increased defense spending in Europe and potential frictions in trade and security cooperation between the two regions, though these changes are unlikely to affect daily life immediately.