How Trump obliterated the best-laid plans of world's most powerful military alliance

London: NATO wanted this week's summit to be relatively boring. A controversy-free meeting, a bland communique, and a polished photo op to show unity. What it's getting instead is a flashpoint – one lit by the United States itself.
Just days before 32 NATO leaders descend on the Dutch capital, the world's most powerful military alliance is watching its agenda be torched by a fresh theatre of war: Iran. And not just Israeli warplanes this time, but American ones, too.
In a stunning military escalation, US forces joined Israel in bombing Iran 's most fortified nuclear sites, including the Fordow enrichment facility buried deep under a mountainside. GBU-57 'bunker-busting' bombs – some of the heaviest non-nuclear ordnance in the American arsenal – were used to punch through rock and concrete. Other strikes hit Natanz and Isfahan.
Trump's message was blunt: 'Obliterated.'
And just like that, the fragile choreography of what might have been NATO's most consequential summit in its 76-year history – carefully designed to hide its internal fractures – has been blown off course.
The summit was never supposed to be about Iran. Or even Ukraine, for that matter.
Loading
To keep US President Donald Trump happy – and at the table – NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte stripped the agenda down to its bare bones. Gone was any serious discussion on Russia's war in Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been downgraded to dinner guest, rather than council participant. The alliance's evolving strategy on Russia? Hidden in a drawer.
Instead, the headline act was supposed to be a carefully pre-cooked pledge from European allies: more defence spending, more kit, more readiness. Trump demands 5 per cent of GDP. Rutte's trying to sell a compromise – 3.5 per cent for core defence, another 1.5 per cent for 'infrastructure' and cybersecurity.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Sydney Morning Herald

22 minutes ago

• Sydney Morning Herald

War in the Middle East is dangerous; Albanese missed his opportunity

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's belated abandonment of Australia's neutral stance on the US joining Israel's attack on Iran is a continuation of the defensive and slow-footed reaction that has marked his record over the 18 months since the Middle East reignited. With US President Donald Trump posturing for days on taking military action against Tehran, Albanese had adequate preparation time. Yet, when the attacks came, the prime minister stayed silent on support. Instead, his office issued a statement by an anonymous government spokesperson calling for de-escalation, dialogue and diplomacy. Such lame silence opened the door for the opposition's canny acting foreign affairs spokesperson, Andrew Hastie, to seize the initiative and back the US strikes and scramble the government onto Monday morning television programs, Foreign Minister Penny Wong and Social Services Minister Tanya Plibersek eventually confirming that the government did indeed support Trump's strikes. Albanese then emerged on Monday to declare that, while the attacks were unilateral action by the US, 'Iran cannot be allowed to get a nuclear weapon, and we support action to prevent that'. He should have said it loud and clear on Sunday. That is not to say the prime minister was letting down our ally by not automatically endorsing American action. The US has been so erratic of late that we do not owe it that, not least because so many unanswered questions flow from the weekend. The legality of the US action is wide open to interpretation and Trump's declaration that Iran's nuclear program had been 'completely and totally obliterated' sits awkwardly beside assertions a day later by senior US officials they did not know the fate of Tehran's stockpile of near-bomb-grade uranium. Further, the UN's nuclear watchdog confirmed all three Iranian facilities had been badly damaged, but said it was not yet in a position to assess the impact underground and Iran has told the International Atomic Energy Agency there has been no increase in off-site radiation levels at the three sites. Trump's withdrawal in 2018 from the Iran nuclear deal reached by seven countries after two years of gruelling negotiation may have helped push Tehran down its current obstinate path. But in the 10 days of war with Israel this month, Iran has received little but verbal support from allies and is perhaps now the most isolated it has been since the 1979 US embassy hostage crisis.

The Age

26 minutes ago

• The Age

White House emphasised strikes were not about regime change. Then Trump logged on to social media

The US was not seeking regime change, they said explicitly. This would not become another Iraq War. But they also indicated the campaign was not singularly about nuclear weapons. Iran had to stop funding terrorism, Vance said. It could not threaten its neighbours. It had to reintegrate into the global community. And just hours later, Trump muddied the waters substantially with a typically stream-of-consciousness social media post. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change', but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' Trump wrote. It was a flippant contribution and, in many ways, stating the obvious. What American president in the past 46 years – since the fall of the puppet Shah in the Iranian Islamic Revolution – would not have welcomed regime change in Tehran? Trump is not about to conduct a military campaign with such an objective in mind. But it could flow from the combined effects of the US and Israel's strikes, Iran's depleted leadership and its severely weakened regional proxies, runaway inflation and a restless populace. As Eric Edelman, a former US undersecretary for defence policy under George W. Bush, wrote in Foreign Affairs two days ago, Iran's ageing Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has been 'comprehensively humbled'. Iranians were unlikely to be unsympathetic, he said, and in past demonstrations had blamed the regime rather than outsiders for their predicament. 'Another major protest movement will undoubtedly arise,' he predicted. Israel, seeing this as its best opportunity to topple the regime, will be looking for support. And Trump, who has already boasted of working in lock-step with Benjamin Netanyahu, would not be able to resist claiming credit should things move in that direction, and may even be tempted to help. But such ongoing involvement, whether militarily or though sanctions or covert operations, carries risks for Americans. There are already reports the Iranians threatened to unleash terrorist 'sleeper cells' in the US in retaliation for the weekend strikes. The US has vast assets and tens of thousands of troops in the Middle East. And the State Department has issued a worldwide alert for Americans outside the US to exercise caution. Loading A conflict escalation that endangers Americans would be bad for Trump. He is operating with enormous goodwill from his base after pulling off 'the greatest political comeback in history'. But it is not limitless, as the backlash of the past few days has shown. Trump's instincts here are complicated. He is emboldened by success, including Israel's. He is desperate for the Nobel Peace Prize, and recently posted a rant about how he is unlikely to ever get one, no matter what he does. He is willing to bully allies who challenge him, and says he alone gets to define what 'America First' means. Brett McGurk, a former national security adviser to multiple presidents, and the Middle East co-ordinator under Joe Biden, said Trump should cast aside any ambitions of regime change. 'We can all hope that this regime, which has so much American blood on its hands, ultimately ends up in the dustbin of history – but that's up to the Iranian people,' he told CNN. 'Let's not mission creep. Stay focused.' Loading

7NEWS

26 minutes ago

• 7NEWS

Expert's advice to Aussie motorists concerned about fuel prices surging

Australian motorists worried about tensions in the Middle East affecting prices at the pump have been sent a clear message: 'Fill up now.' US President Donald Trump 's administration carried out an attack on three nuclear sites in Iran on Saturday. It comes after Israel launched attacks on Iran earlier this month. Oil prices are expected to rise as a result of the escalation in conflict, however experts have spoken out to ease fears of immediate surges. 'It's really important for Australians today to understand that what we have seen again over the weekend, while it is another escalation above and beyond the escalation we saw the weekend before it, this is the Middle East,' NRMA spokesperson Peter Khoury said. 'Unfortunately, flare-ups are all too often and all too common.' The regional benchmark for oil in Australia, Tapis, is expected to increase in price by tonight, Khoury said. 'We don't know by how much,' he said. Based on what we're seeing out of the US, it could be $3 or $4 a barrel.' Why could petrol prices rise? A possible way for Iran to retaliate against the US and Israel is to close off the Strait of Hormuz. The strait is a vital trade route used to transport 20 per cent of the world's crude oil, or about 20 million barrels per day. The Iranian parliament has backed closing the strait in response to the US attacks, though this must be approved by Iran's national security council. Oil prices could shoot above $100 per barrel if the strait is closed for a prolonged period, according to Goldman Sachs and consulting firm Rapidan Energy. JPMorgan analysts view the risk of Iran closing Hormuz as low because the US would view such a move as a declaration of war. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday called on China to help prevent Iran from closing the strait. Rubio said it would be 'economic suicide' for Iran to close the strait because the Islamic Republic's oil exports also pass through the waterway. Currently, it remains open. Khoury said this is 'the most important thing'. 'We do not want Australians panicking,' he said. 'Yes, there is speculation about what could happen in the next days and weeks, but it is the Middle East and anything can happen. 'The other important thing for Australians to know tonight is that if you live in Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne, Adelaide or Perth, fill up now.' A combination of prices being at or near the bottom of the cycle and turmoil in the Middle East mean now is the time to buy. 'Prices are either in the high $1.60s or in the low $1.70s,' Khoury said. 'That has everything to do with the domestic price cycles in those capital cities. 'The wholesale price in Australia has gone up about eight cents a litre since two Fridays ago when the escalation really flared up between Israel and Iran. 'It will go up again, is the expectation, based on the US decision to attack Iran over the weekend. 'But it's only gone up eight cents a litre in the last week and a bit. 'There's a lot of speculation about what could happen. It's really important that Australians focus on what is happening. 'And what is happening if you live in those bigger cities is that prices are pretty good.' Khoury advised motorists to check fuel prices near them and find the best deal. 'You can find some real bargains,' he said. 'On any given day, there can be huge gaps in the price of the cheapest service station and the price of the most expensive. 'In Sydney today, it's 70 cents a litre. 'Regardless of what's going on in the Middle East or anywhere else, and regardless of where we are in the price cycle, do your research, use the information that you have access to that motorists in other countries don't have. 'We fought hard to get that made public. It's there for you to use.' When asked when the conflict overseas will affect local prices, Khoury said it normally takes about seven to 10 days. Our service stations are yet to buy the more expensive barrels but when that happens, it will have a flow on effect. 'The NRMA will be monitoring those prices really carefully over the next days and weeks, because what we won't tolerate, obviously, is oil companies manipulating what's going on overseas to put their prices up any higher than they should go,' he said. Could we see a global oil crisis? Khoury also emphasised that even if the strait is closed, it would not create a similar crisis to those caused by other recent global conflicts. 'In 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine, Russia being the second-largest producer of oil,' he said. 'That created an initial shock.' 'Obviously, the world was going to enforce sanctions, and they did. That created an even bigger shock. 'At the same time that that happened, the COVID supply crisis that affected the whole world hit its peak. So we all came out of COVID lockdown at the same time. 'The whole world came out of lockdown at the same time. Demand for oil spiked. Supply could not keep up. So we had probably the worst supply issue or challenge in our lifetime. 'And then Russia invaded Ukraine. 'All of those things had to happen at the same time for Tapis, our regional oil price, to hit $133 a barrel. 'It's currently at $76 a barrel. 'So to get back to those record high prices that we saw back in 2022, you would need a catastrophe at that level to affect global supply. 'We're not there yet, clearly, based on oil prices and the wholesale price. 'And I think that's what we want Australians to focus on tonight.'