Without dignity, the leader falls at the feet of Trump in The Hague – What is this? All NATO key issues remain | Martin Kettle

nATO’s Hague Summit is a carefully planned Grovel under Donald Trump’s feet. The initial planned two-day meeting was truncated into a formal business for the The President’s Self and adapt to his brief range of attention. The agenda cynically narrowed down the upward spending he demanded from our allies. Questions that may cause or embarrass Trump – Ukrainian conflict, or whether there is an Iranian nuclear threat Actually eliminated American Bombardment – Relegated to off-field.

Replace Lead by Mark Rutte The disease of gathering. On Tuesday, Rut praised Trump’s talent for Iran. Yesterday, he dedicated him to him because NATO went toward NATO’s defense lawyer 5% of GDP Expenditure target. No one ruined the party. As Fiona Hill, the president’s own former adviser, said yesterday, NATO seemed to have briefly become a North Atlantic Trump organization.

But for Lat and most league leaders, it’s a 24-hour self-coverage with specific goals. The purpose of the first NATO summit for the second Trump presidency was to make the United States and the Transatlantic Alliance as fully grasped as possible. Nothing else matters. Any shocks delivered to Europe by JD Vance and Pete Hegseth at the Munich Security Conference in February will be avoided at all costs. In order to pursue this goal, Humiliation or hypocrisy Too rough.

So, is it a task for NATO? Perhaps yes, judging by Trump’s overall good behavior in The Hague. 5% of the promise is”Very big newsHe announced.

But in every long-term approach, this app can solve nothing around Trump. From a political standpoint, the Hague summit did not mark a recovery of normal relations, let alone new ones NATO Golden Age. In the Trump era, such things were impossible. Politically speaking, the top of the mountain is a shelter for shelter. Indeed, things didn’t get worse, and many results, including Rutte, would be considered an achievement. However, NATO has no other established difficulties solved. Most people stay firm.

Among them, four stand out. The first and most direct one is Ukraine. Trump’s impatientness with Ukraine, his belief in a ceasefire or his unwillingness to renew U.S. military aid has not changed. However, other NATO members are not able to provide the assistance they need in Ukraine. So the war is bound, partly because of Trump. Some people believe that war may even become permanent. Carnegie donated analyst and former Ukrainian defense minister: “Rather than assuming that the war can end with a full battlefield victory or negotiation compromise.” Andriy Zagorodnyuk wrote Earlier this month, “Ukraine and its allies must plan to build viable, sovereign and secure countries under ongoing military pressure.” Trump will not be interested.

The second difficulty is Trump’s sheer unpredictability. In The Hague, everything is carefully orchestrated, but how long will this last? No one can be sure of it. The world is still absorbing the meaning of Trump’s impulsive processing Iranone day it was rejected, one day before the war began, the next military operation, followed by the declaration of peace to peace. The Iranian bombing has actually had little impact on the president’s NATO allies and highlighted the difficulties of second speculation about Trump’s actions.

This will go to the third question. The commitment to spending 5% of GDP on defense is a policy goal, not the current reality. For example, the UK’s goal is 5% by 2035and it can only be done by some fraudster planners that can legally categorize as safe, as the government’s new national security strategy document released on Tuesday matches the NATO summit, which is clear.

Ten years is a long time. A lot of changes will happen. Trump’s successor may be more committed to NATO, or they may be more unreliable than him. There may also be regime changes in other places. No one knows. As the UAV Revolution shows, war will surely change. NATO needs to be careful not to bring 20th-century assumptions to the 21st century plan. The National Security Strategy Document correctly viewed this period as an era of “substantially uncertain”. However, investors including high-value high-tech industries such as defense include uncertainty.

This puts us in the fourth question. Using Trump to fix things may not be resolved because he Enter your own drum. But the threat will not disappear. This means that European NATO countries and Canada must develop a viable collective defense system for hostile threats that do not depend on the White House’s whimsical imaginations at the White House. That was a very huge task. But Washington cannot deny whether European countries defend themselves from Russian aggression.

In this case, there is no real choice. Allies face a huge task to gradually reduce their long-term dependence on American technology and arms without causing a complete breakdown with the United States. At the same time, they must improve their defense capabilities and Europe. It’s a difficult process and British political leaders, who don’t mind the security world of Britain, will be very uncomfortable. However, this is the one we boarded.