NATO's 2025 summit in The Hague could make history. Here's why
U.S. President Donald Trump and his NATO counterparts are due to gather Tuesday for a summit that could unite the world's biggest security organization around a new defense spending pledge or widen divisions among the 32 allies.
Just a week ago, things had seemed rosy. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte was optimistic the European members and Canada would commit to invest at least as much of their economic growth on defense as the United States does for the first time.
Then Spain rejected the new NATO target for each country to spend 5% of its gross domestic product on defense needs, calling it 'unreasonable.' Trump also insists on that figure. The alliance operates on a consensus that requires the backing of all 32 members.
The following day, Trump said the U.S. should not have to respect the goal.
'I don't think we should, but I think they should,' he said. Trump lashed out at Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez's government, saying: 'NATO is going to have to deal with Spain. Spain's been a very low payer.' He also criticized Canada as 'a low payer.'
Spain was the lowest spender in the alliance last year, directing less than 2% of its GDP on defense expenditure, while Canada was spending 1.45%, according to NATO figures.
Then Trump ordered the bombing of nuclear installations in Iran. In 2003, the U.S.-led war on Iraq deeply divided NATO, as France and Germany led opposition to the attack, while Britain and Spain joined the coalition.
European allies and Canada also want Ukraine to be at the top of the summit agenda, but they are wary that Trump might not want President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to steal the limelight.
A short summit, decades of mutual security
The two-day summit in The Hague involves an informal dinner Tuesday and one working session Wednesday morning. A very short summit statement has been drafted to ensure the meeting is not derailed by fights over details and wording.
Indeed, much about this NATO summit is brief, even though ripples could be felt for years.
Founded in 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed by 12 nations to counter the threat to security in Europe posed by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, notably via a strong U.S. presence on the continent.
Dealing with Moscow is in its DNA. Keeping the peace outside the Euro-Atlantic area is not.
NATO's ranks have grown to 32 countries since the Washington Treaty was signed 75 years ago. Sweden joined last year, worried by an increasingly aggressive Russia.
NATO's collective security guarantee — Article 5 of the treaty — underpins its credibility.
It's a political commitment by all countries to come to the aid of any member whose sovereignty or territory might be under attack. Trump has suggested he is committed to that pledge, but he has also sowed doubt about his intentions. He has said the U.S. intends to remain a member of the alliance.
A civilian runs NATO, but the U.S. and its military hold power
The United States is NATO's most powerful member. It spends much more on defense than any other ally and far outweighs its partners in terms of military muscle. Washington has traditionally driven the agenda but has stepped back under Trump.
The U.S. nuclear arsenal provides strategic deterrence against would-be adversaries.
NATO's day-to-day work is led by Rutte, a former Dutch prime minister.
As its top civilian official, he chairs almost weekly meetings of ambassadors in the North Atlantic Council at its Brussels headquarters. He chairs other 'NACs' at ministerial and leader levels. Rutte runs NATO headquarters, trying to foster consensus and to speak on behalf of all members.
NATO's military headquarters is based nearby in Mons, Belgium. It is always run by a top U.S. officer.
Ukraine's role at the summit is unclear
With Trump demanding greater defense spending, it's unclear what role Ukraine will play at the summit. Zelenskyy has been invited, but it's unclear whether he will have a seat at NATO's table, although he may take part in Tuesday's dinner. Russia's war in Ukraine usually dominates such meetings.
More broadly, NATO itself is not arming Ukraine. As an organization, it possesses no weapons of any kind. Collectively, it provides only non-lethal support — fuel, combat rations, medical supplies, body armor, and equipment to counter drones or mines.
But individually, members do send arms. European allies provided 60% of the military support that Ukraine received in 2024. NATO coordinates those weapons deliveries via a hub on the Polish border and helps organize training for Ukrainian troops.
NATO's troop plans
A key part of the commitment for allies to defend one another is to deter Russia, or any other adversary, from attacking in the first place. Finland and Sweden joined NATO recently because of this concern.
Under NATO's new military plans, 300,000 military personnel would be deployed within 30 days to counter any attack, whether it be on land, at sea, by air or in cyberspace. But experts doubt whether the allies could muster the troop numbers.
It's not just about troop and equipment numbers. An adversary would be less likely to challenge NATO if it thought the allies would use the forces it controls. Trump's threats against U.S. allies — including imposing tariffs on them — has weakened that deterrence.
The U.S. is carrying the biggest military burden
Due to high U.S. defense spending over many years, the American armed forces have more personnel and superior weapons but also significant transportation and logistics assets.
Other allies are starting to spend more, though. After years of cuts, NATO members committed to ramp up their national defense budgets in 2014 when Russia illegally annexed Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula.
After Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the NATO allies agreed to make 2% of GDP the minimum spending level. Last year, 22 countries were expected to hit that target, up from only three a decade ago.
In The Hague, the allies were expected to up the ante to 3.5%, plus a further 1.5% for things like improving roads, bridges, ports and airfields or preparing societies to deal with future conflicts. Whether they will now remains an open question.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Oil tanks 6% as Iranian retaliation against US spares energy supply
Oil futures slid 6% on Monday as Iran appeared to spare the energy market while the country launched missiles targeted at a US air base in Qatar in retaliation for US bombings on Iranian nuclear sites. Brent crude (BZ=F), the international benchmark, dropped to $72 per barrel. West Texas Intermediate (CL=F) also fell roughly 6% to trade below $70 per barrel. The declines came after Iranian state media said it launched missile attacks against a US air base in Qatar, matching the number of bombs dropped by the US over the weekend, in a move the Associated Press said signaled "a likely desire to deescalate." Prior to the retaliatory move, Wall Street weighed various scenarios after President Trump announced on Saturday that the US struck three Iranian nuclear facilities, including the threat of Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for oil flows. On Monday morning, President Trump posted on social media: "To The Department of Energy: DRILL, BABY, DRILL!!! And I mean NOW!!!" "The main reason for this stability is that energy infrastructure has largely been spared from direct attacks, with number of oil tankers transiting through the Strait of Hormuz remaining steady," JPMorgan's Natasha Kaneva and her team wrote on Monday morning. On Sunday, futures spiked after Iran's parliament voted to close the Strait of Hormuz, but the final decision rests with Iran's Supreme National Security Council and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The oil market is now factoring in "a one-in-five chance of a material disruption in Gulf energy production flows, with potential for crude prices to reach the $120-130 range," Kaneva wrote. "Yet, beyond the short-term spike induced by geopolitics, our base case for oil remains anchored by our supply-demand balance, which shows that the world has enough oil," she added. She also noted that "with fewer reliable partners in the Middle East and limited regional appetite for a broader conflict, Iran faces a constrained set of options and a heightened set of risks as it deliberates its course of action." Other possible retaliatory moves from Iran could include supporting Yemen's Houthi rebels in renewed attacks on commercial shipping, or going after energy infrastructure in neighboring countries. If crude climbs into the $120 to $130 range, analysts predict gasoline and diesel prices could rise by as much as $1.25 per gallon. "Consumers would be looking at a national average gasoline price of around $4.50 per gallon — closer to $6.00 if you're in California," Lipow Oil Associates president Andy Lipow said in a Sunday note. The key issue isn't just the potential for supply disruption, but how long it lasts, Rebecca Babin, senior energy trader at CIBC Private Wealth, told Yahoo Finance on Sunday. "If infrastructure is hit but can be quickly restored, crude may struggle to hold gains," she said. "But if Iran's response causes lasting damage or introduces long-term supply risk, we're likely to see a stronger and more sustained move higher." Last week, JPMorgan analysts noted that since 1967 — aside from the Yom Kippur War in 1973 — none of the 11 major military conflicts involving Israel have had a lasting impact on oil prices. In contrast, events directly involving major regional oil producers, such as the first Gulf War in 1990, the Iraq War in 2003 and the imposition of sanctions on Iran in 2018, have all led to meaningful and sustained moves in oil markets. "During these episodes, we estimate that oil traded at a $7–$14 per barrel premium to its fair value for an extended period," JPMorgan's Kaneva wrote. They added that the most significant and lasting price impacts historically come from "regime changes" in oil-producing countries, whether that be through leadership transitions, coups, revolutions, or major political shifts. "While demand conditions and OPEC's spare capacity shape the broader market response, these events typically drive substantial oil price spikes, averaging a 76% increase from onset to peak," Kaneva wrote. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies (OPEC+) had raised output in the months leading up to Israel's strike on Iran on June 13. Ines Ferre is a Senior Business Reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow her on X at @ines_ferre. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fed officials are starting to break rank and join Trump
Some Federal Reserve officials are joining President Donald Trump in calling for lower interest rates as soon as July. Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman on Monday downplayed the potential impacts of Trump's tariffs on prices and said the US central bank should swiftly lower rates to preserve the labor market's health. 'It is time to consider adjusting the policy rate,' Bowman said. 'Should inflation pressures remain contained, I would support lowering the policy rate as soon as our next meeting in order to bring it closer to its neutral setting and to sustain a healthy labor market.' Bowman is the second Fed official to join Trump in calling for lower borrowing costs. On Friday, Fed Governor Christopher Waller said tariffs will likely only result in a 'one-off' increase in inflation. Both Bowman and Waller are Trump appointees. For months, Fed officials have said they prefer to wait to see how Trump's major policy shifts affect the US economy first before considering further rate cuts. At its policy meeting earlier this month, the Fed kept its benchmark lending rate unchanged for the fourth consecutive time. But that strategy hasn't sat well with Trump, who has relentlessly lashed out at the central bank and its leader, Fed Chair Jerome Powell, for not lowering rates. Trump has hurled various insults at Powell, describing him as a 'fool' and a 'numbskull.' Now, the Fed's wait-and-see posture is slowly crumbling, even as tensions in the Middle East heat up, which raises the risk of higher global energy prices. And the jury is still out on the ultimate impact of Trump's tariffs. Bowman said it's possible the Israel-Iran conflict — which escalated over the weekend with the US striking at three Iranian nuclear sites — results in higher commodity prices. And there's still the lingering possibility of Trump's trade war also pushing up prices, she said. Still, that may not even result in higher consumer prices because businesses don't have much leverage to hike prices this time around, Bowman said. 'I am certainly attentive to these inflation risks, but I am not yet seeing a major concern, as some retailers seem unwilling to raise prices for essentials due to high price sensitivity among low-income consumers and as supply chains appear to be largely unaffected so far,' Bowman said. Bowman isn't the only Fed official seemingly not worried about the potential economic impact of the Israel-Iran conflict. Powell has said higher energy prices spurred by the conflict will likely be short lived. 'When there's turmoil in the Middle East, you may see a spike in energy prices, but it tends to come down. Those things don't generally tend to have lasting effects on inflation, although of course in the 1970s, they famously did,' Powell said in a news conference following the Fed's June 17-18 policy meeting. 'But, we haven't seen anything like that now. The U.S. economy is far less dependent on foreign oil than it was back in the 1970s,' he added. Economists have said the economic impact of the current conflict largely depends on how out of hand it gets. A forecast from analysts at EY-Parthenon shows that the US economy could contract by a massive 1.9% annualized rate if the Middle East plunges into an all-out regional war. But in a 'contained' scenario, the US economy could contract only slightly. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gold ETFs Shine in 1H: Will the Bloom Continue in 2H?
Gold has been on a powerful upward trajectory this year, fueled by strong safe-haven demand amid Trump's tariff chaos and escalating geopolitical tensions, weakening U.S. dollar and growing expectations of Federal Reserve rate cuts. The yellow metal has posted monthly gains for five straight months as of May, its longest run since 2017. It hit a new all-time high of $3,500 in April and then retreated from this level. Gold has moved up 27% since the start of the to a report by Axis Securities, gold is on track to reach a milestone with a six-month winning streak not seen in over two decades (read: Gold Up 27% YTD: How Long Will the Rally Last?).Given the surge in gold prices, gold mining ETFs are blooming in the first half, with many analysts expecting further gains in the second half. The mining companies act as leveraged plays on the underlying metal prices and, thus, tend to experience more gains than their bullion cousins in a rising metal Gold Miners ETF SGDM is leading the pack, jumping 65% since the start of the year, followed by gains of 63.7% for Themes Gold Miners ETF AUMI, 61% for VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF GDXJ, 59.7% for Global X Gold Explorers ETF GOEX, and 58.8% for iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF have highlighted several reasons for the solid rally in gold and its outlook: President Donald Trump's set of tariffs has lured investors to shift to defensive investments. Gold is often used to preserve wealth during financial and political uncertainty and usually does well when other asset classes struggle. Additionally, the inflationary pressure caused by new tariffs will benefit the precious metal's status as a hedge against rising prices. A weaker dollar and sustained central bank buying also buoyed gold's rally this year. The central banks are dominant buyers of gold as they seek to diversify their reserves away from the U.S. dollar. According to a recent survey conducted by the World Gold Council, about 95% of central banks believe their gold reserves will increase over the next 12 months. Though the Fed has kept interest rates steady at the latest meeting, an imminent rate cut can be in the cards in the next couple of months. Lower interest rates reduce the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets like gold, increasing its attractiveness over fixed-income investments such as now forecast gold to trade between $3,500 and $3,700 as investors seek refuge from escalating geopolitical tensions and rising inflation risks. Goldman Sachs reiterated its bullish long-term view on gold, highlighting strong central bank demand. Goldman forecasts gold to reach $3,700 by the end of 2025 and $4,000 by mid-2026. In a recession scenario, accelerating ETF inflows can lift gold to $3,880 by year-end. Year to date, the two largest gold ETFs — SPDR Gold Shares GLD and iShares Gold Trust IAU — have attracted more than $11 billion in combined inflows, according to SPDR Gold Shares alone has taken in nearly $7 billion, ranking it No. 13 among all ETFs by asset flows (read: Why Gold ETFs Offer the Best Safe Haven Right Now). Let us delve into each ETF below:Sprott Gold Miners ETF (SGDM)Sprott Gold Miners ETF follows the Solactive Gold Miners Custom Factors Index, which aims to track the performance of larger-sized gold companies whose stocks are listed on Canadian and major U.S. exchanges. It holds 37 stocks in its basket. Canada takes the top spot at 75.2%, followed by 17.6% in the United States. Sprott Gold Miners ETF has amassed $418.6 million in its asset base and trades in a lower volume of around 42,000 shares a day. It charges 50 bps in annual fees from investors. Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI)Themes Gold Miners ETF seeks to track the Solactive Global Pure Gold Miners Index, which identifies the largest 30 companies by market capitalization, deriving their revenues from gold mining. It holds 28 stocks in its basket, with Canadian firms accounting for 58.6% of the portfolio, followed by Australian firms with a 27.5% share. Themes Gold Miners ETF has accumulated $10.4 million in its asset base. It charges 35 bps in fees per year and trades in a lower average daily volume of 7,000 Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF offers exposure to small-capitalization companies that are involved primarily in the mining of gold and/or silver and tracks the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. Holding 92 stocks in its basket, Canadian firms dominate the fund's portfolio with a 47.8% share, whereas Australia (20.4%) and South Africa (6.4%) round out the top three. VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF has an AUM of $5.7 billion and charges 51 bps in annual fees. It trades in a heavy volume of around 5 million shares a day on X Gold Explorers ETF (GOEX) Global X Gold Explorers ETF provides exposure to companies involved in the exploration of gold deposits and tracks the Solactive Global Gold Explorers & Developers Total Return Index. It is home to 51 stocks. Canadian firms dominate the fund's return at 54.1%, followed by Australia (27.6%) and the United States (8.8%). Global X Gold Explorers ETF is unpopular and illiquid, with an AUM of $66.5 million and an average daily volume of 17,000 shares. The expense ratio comes in at 0.65% (read: Should You Buy Gold or Gold Miners Now?).iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF offers exposure to companies that derive the majority of their revenues from gold mining. It follows the MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index and holds 42 securities in its portfolio. Canadian firms take more than half of the portfolio, while the United States takes the next spot at 17.2% share. RING is the cheapest choice in the gold mining space, charging just 39 bps in fees and expenses. iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF has been able to manage assets worth $1.5 billion and trades in a good volume of 275,000 shares per day. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report SPDR Gold Shares (GLD): ETF Research Reports iShares Gold Trust (IAU): ETF Research Reports VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ): ETF Research Reports iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING): ETF Research Reports Sprott Gold Miners ETF (SGDM): ETF Research Reports Global X Gold Explorers ETF (GOEX): ETF Research Reports Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI): ETF Research Reports This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research
