The comments of the NATO chief betray the reality of the military alliance’s vision on Trump

Most Governments and inhabitants in Europe agree With the indicated premise of Trump that they must spend more on their soldiers-and stop their historic post-war dependence in the United States. But Trump’s unpredictability still causes great anxiety on the continent, in particular its repeated interrogation of the promise of mutual defense in the heart of NATO, which was established after the Second World War to counter the Soviet Union.

NATO members voted on Wednesday for more than double their defense expenditure targets at 5% of the gross domestic product, accessing Trump’s demand. This caused a concern when Trump suggested for the first time in January, but was then accepted without too much open protest.

However, some analysts in the defense industry Treated European members of the Alliance with open hostility and which has upset decades of American policy by initiating a rapprochement with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Sven Biscop, director of the EGMONT Institute, a reflection group in Brussels, agrees with the elevation of European defense spending. But he said that “the emphasis on the 5% target is the bad tactics” because Trump seems to have “torn off this number of thin.”

“If he is supposed to keep Trump happy, I don’t think it will keep him happy for a very long time,” said Biscop.

He warned that European countries could find themselves in a wrestling. If they do not lift expenses, “Trump will say:” Well, if you don’t even want to defend yourself, why should I do it for you? “” Said Biscop. “But if we strengthen our defense, Trump will say:” You can clearly do it for yourself, so I will reduce my commitment anyway. “”

The previous NATO chief, Jens Stoltenberg, became known as a “Trump whisper” for his skillful management of a president who wanted to leave the alliance. But Rutte went even further in her praise of Trump.

Rutte’s text message was “so subordinate and obsequious,” said Biscop. “It is also counterproductive. I think he will lose respect for other leaders and it will not buy respect for Trump.”

NATO refused to comment when it was asked for criticism of the Rutte language.

The central dilemma of Europe remains: how to appease a president who openly declared his opposition to multilateral organizations and shamelessly spoke of Europe as an “enemy”?

Since the first term of Trump, many European leaders have accepted that they could no longer rely on the level of engagement offered by Atlantean presidents such as Joe Biden. The calculation of Biden and its predecessors was that America subscribes to European security, and in return has an enormous influence on political, diplomatic and even cultural events on the continent and beyond.

With Trump doubling his rejection of this model, the European powers committed hundreds of billions of others this year in their defense industries, promising to go up production and the purchase of military equipment.

This leaves another “question, quite critical for European leaders,” said Brett Bruen, director of world engagement for President Barack Obama And an American career diplomat. What does European military independence “really” mean? He said.

Trump suggested for years that he would not honor article 5 – the NATO central clause which suggests that the allies would come with the other if one of them was attacked. Although he tried to appease these fears on Wednesday – saying: “We are with them throughout”, when asked for the clause – many managers and experts say that occasional support notes do not break the damage of the previous comments undergoing a confidence -based alliance.

Asked about the concerns in Europe concerning Trump’s commitment to NATO, the White House spokesperson Anna Kelly, told NBC News: “President Trump obtained a massive victory by providing a historic 5%expenses, and the place of America as a free world leader was restored by peace.

If Europe trusts the United States to honor its commitments of article 5, it may only need to increase the shortcomings of the American military presence on the continent, said Bruen, now president of the world situation room, a communications company based in Virginia. But if uncertainty persists, then European forces should be a “safety net for American capacities, which is both duplicate and stupid,” he said.

“All of Europe’s security architecture was based on the idea we do together,” he added. But “Trump has not yet said whether or not the United States will remain an unshakable partner in Europe, or if he intends to retreat.”

The “biggest problem in the future is: what does article 5 mean for Donald Trump?” Bruen added.