The NATO summit in The Hague was a success. Agreements were made and the US President Donald Trump said he left with a higher dunk of his European allies than he had before arrival in the Netherlands. But the top also made it clear that there are unhealthy power relations within NATO and that the alliance of Democrats censor itself. Central was a promise about defense spending that will not be fulfilled quickly. Important questions about the future relationship with Ukraine and the presence of American soldiers in Europe were bypassed or delayed.
On Wednesday, the heads of government were able to go home with his head held high: there were agreements on paper for the future, the unit was more or less intact and the US President Donald Trump was wrapped so skillfully that he did not repeat his anger outbursts of previous NATO tops in The Hague. Where he had treated European leaders as toddlers at earlier peaks, he now said he had met European leaders who wanted to make an effort to protect their population and that he will be happy to help.
At the top, diplomatic and political preparation preceded months and that paid off. Secretary-General Mark Rutte and his team opted for a short top with an ultra-short final statement to keep the space for disagreements and irritations as small as possible. The final statement of The Hague consists of only four substantive paragraphs.
Rutte knew that the US had one requirement: the defense spending must be raised considerably. Trump made a blow in the air in January when he said that spending should rise from 2 percent of gross domestic product to 5 percent. From that moment Rutte knew: there must be a 5 in that final statement – and it is indeed there.
The new standard of 5 percent is a package leaflet. Countries must spend 3.5 percent on military affairs and may spend the remaining 1.5 percent on preconditions as improved infrastructure. With that trumpet, Rutte brought Trumps astronomical requirement back to substructure proportions. The military planners in Brussels have calculated that the plans for NATO’s defense require an investment of approximately 3.5 percent.
Spain broke through the consensus with the laconic announcement that it can also kill its NATO obligations by 2.1 percent of GDP. The intention is that countries are gradually growing to the 3.5 percent, but it is about such enormous amounts that the European welfare states are waiting for painful choices.
The final statement repeats important principles. Russia is described as a threat and Article 5 – an attack on one country is an attack on all – is once again endorsed.
Ukraine didn’t win much on the top, but the yield for Kyiv was bigger than a few weeks ago. President Zensky was clearly visible at the top and spoke for an hour with Trump. According to both parties, the conversation went smoothly. Trump was not entirely opposed to the delivery of more anti -aircraft systems. In the final statement, the importance of Ukraine for NATO’s safety is recognized. Allies may therefore count their military support for KYIV for the 3.5 percent standard. There was no mention of the future relationship between NATO and Ukraine. Not Zensky was central, but Trump.
At the top, the reorganization of the American armed forces was also not mentioned. Washington wants more scope in Asia and that is probably at the expense of Europe. The plans are expected after the summer.
Rutte became NATO’s new boss last year because he knows how to deal with Trump. His recipe: do not contradict too much and compliment unrestrained. That also worked in The Hague. Rutte welcomed Trump with a message in which he was mentioned in advance the winner of the top and was praised for the bombing in Iran.
On the top, Rutte Trump indirectly described as a ‘daddy’, who had taken the fighting children Iran and Israel apart. The White House promptly made a short video of Trumps visit to The Hague on the tones of Usher’s Hey Daddy (Daddy’s Home).
The ‘Daddy’ issue made it painfully clear that relationships in the alliance are very leading. The US is by far the most important ally and it is essential to keep Trump on board, but submission also detracts from the stature of a Secretary General, who not only has to listen to Washington but must also be able to mediate between European allies.