logo
ENع
32 nations but only one man matters - Nato's summit is all about Trump

32 nations but only one man matters - Nato's summit is all about Trump

BBC News8 hours ago

Nato summits tend to be "pre-cooked", not least to present a united front.Secretary General Mark Rutte has already settled on the menu for their meeting at The Hague: one that will avoid a row with Nato's most powerful member, the US.A commitment to increase defence spending by European allies is the dish that President Donald Trump wants served – and that's exactly what he'll be getting. Though there will inevitably be the added ingredients of compromise and fudge.Nor will the summit be able to paper over the cracks between Trump and many of his European allies on trade, Russia and the escalating conflict in the Middle East.The US president, whose mantra is America First, is not a huge fan of multinational organisations.He has been highly critical of Nato too – even questioning its very foundation of collective defence. In Trump's first term, at his first Nato summit, he berated European allies for not spending enough and owing the US "massive amounts of money".On that message he has at least been consistent.
Mark Rutte, who has a good relationship with the US president, has worked hard to give him a win.The summit takes place at the World Forum in The Hague over two days, on Tuesday and Wednesday next week.Now the main discussions will last just three hours and the summit statement is being reduced to five paragraphs, reportedly because of the US president's demands.Trump is one of 32 leaders from the Western defensive alliance who are coming, along with the heads of more than a dozen partner countries.Dutch police have mounted their biggest ever security operation for the most expensive Nato summit so far, at a cost of €183.4m (£155m; $210m).Some have suggested the brevity of the summit is in part to cater to the US president's attention span and dislike of long meetings. But a shorter summit with fewer subjects discussed will, more importantly, help hide divisions.Ed Arnold, of the defence think tank Rusi, says Trump likes to be the star of the show and predicts he'll be able to claim that he's forced European nations to act.In truth he's not the first US president to criticise allies' defence spending. But he's had more success than most. Kurt Volker, a former US ambassador to Nato, admits that some European governments do not like the way Trump's gone about it – demanding that allies spend 5% of their GDP on defence.
Europe still only accounts for 30% of Nato's total military spending. Volker says many Europeans now admit they that "we needed to do this, even if it's unfortunate that it took such a kick in the pants".Some European nations are already boosting their defence spending to 5% of their GDP. Most are the countries living in close proximity to Russia – such as Poland, Estonia and Lithuania.It's not just Trump who's been piling on the pressure. Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is forcing a response.But in reality many Nato members will struggle to meet the new target. A few haven't met the goal of 2%, set more than a decade ago.Rutte's compromise formula is for allies to increase their core defence spending to 3.5% of GDP, with an additional 1.5% towards defence-related expenditure.But the definition of defence-related expenditure appears to be so vague that it might be rendered meaningless. Rutte says it could include the cost of industry of infrastructure – building bridges, roads and railways. Ed Arnold, of Rusi, says it'll inevitably lead to more "creative accounting".Even if, as expected, the new spending target is approved, some nations may have little intent of reaching it – by 2032 or 2035. The timescale's still unclear. Spain's prime minister has already called it unreasonable and counterproductive. Sir Keir Starmer hasn't even been able to say when the UK will spend 3% of its GDP of defence. The UK prime minister only said that it was an ambition some time in the next parliament. However, given the UK government's stated policy of putting Nato at the heart of the UK's defence policy, Sir Keir will have to back the new plan.The real danger is to interpret the demand for an increase in defence spending as arbitrary, a symbolic gesture – or just bowing to US pressure. It's also driven by Nato's own defence plans on how it would respond to an attack by Russia. Rutte himself has said that Russia could attack a Nato country within five years.
Those defence plans remain secret. But Rutte's already set out what the Alliance is lacking. In a speech earlier this month he said Nato needed a 400% increase in its air and missile defences: thousands more armoured vehicles and tanks, and millions more artillery shells. Most member states, including the UK, do not yet meet their Nato capability commitments. It's why Sweden plans to double the size of its army and Germany is looking to boost its troop numbers by 60,000.The plans go into granular detail as to how the Alliance will defend its Eastern flank should Russia invade. In a recent speech, the head of the US Army in Europe, General Christopher Donahue, highlighted the need to defend Polish and Lithuanian territory near the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad. He said the Alliance had looked at its existing capabilities and "realised very quickly they are not sufficient".Yet, strangely, specific discussions about Russia and the war in Ukraine will be muted. It's the one big issue that now divides Europe and America. Kurt Volker says, under Trump, the US "does not see Ukrainian security as essential to European security but our European allies do".Trump has already shattered Nato's united front by talking to Putin and withholding military support to Ukraine.Ed Arnold says contentious issues have been stripped from the summit. Not least to avoid a schism with Trump. Leaders were supposed to discuss a new Russia strategy, but it's not on the agenda.Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been invited to the summit dinner, but he won't be taking part in the main discussions of the North Atlantic Council.Rutte will be hoping that his first summit as secretary general will be short and sweet. But with Trump at odds with most of his allies on Russia, the greatest threat facing the Alliance, there's no guarantee it'll go according to plan.

Hashtags

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Rachel Reeves's plan is unravelling. She could be gone before the next Budget
Rachel Reeves's plan is unravelling. She could be gone before the next Budget

Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Telegraph

Rachel Reeves's plan is unravelling. She could be gone before the next Budget

It can't be easy living in the maelstrom of 11 Downing Street these days. First, Rachel Reeves had to endure almost four months of being warned what not to do with taxes, such was the brittleness of the UK economy. Then – after she chose to both increase taxes by a record amount and increase borrowing so she could afford her spending commitments – came months of warnings about the dire consequences. People are losing their jobs because of her choices, which will push up benefit claims and spending. Tax revenues will fall rather than increase by the numbers she expected. The economy has been flatlining with miniscule and highly erratic growth as it stops, starts, then stalls – seemingly on an endless repeat. Then there were the cuts to pensioners' heating allowances, the cuts to disability benefits, the death tax changes for farmers, businesses and pensions. On top of that, there were the tax rises we always knew were likely because Labour had refused to rule them out – the increases in capital gains tax and stamp duty, and the removal of incentives to entrepreneurs. It has maybe taken longer than some of us expected, but the bad news for the Chancellor – and us – now seems to be arriving like buses. I've imagined what it's like to be at the end of that constant deluge of bad numbers. 'Incoming!' The annual estimate for public sector borrowing for year ending March 2025 is £148.3bn – £17.2bn more than last year and £11bn more than the OBR forecast. Reeves carries on with her Sudoku. 'Incoming!' Oh no! The latest inflation figures for April have surged to 3.4pc, trending towards double the Bank of England's target of 2pc. Reeves stares out the window. 'Incoming!' The unemployment rate is up 0.2pc to 4.6pc – the highest since 2021. The unemployed claimant count is up 107,000 year-on-year to 1.73 million. 'Incoming!' Monthly GDP is down -0.3pc, three times worse than the -0.1pc consensus prediction. Reeves purses her lips. Looking forward, we can imagine over the months of July, August and September an unrelenting series of indicators breaking bad. 'Incoming!' The latest tax receipts are below estimates. The latest borrowing numbers are up again. Finally, the markets are beginning to react. 'Incoming!' The pound has fallen to $1.20, the lowest since 2023. Gilts are moving too. 'Incoming!' Ten-year gilt yields are over 5pc. The Bank of England reverses course and puts rates up to 4.5pc. 'Incoming!' The team from the IMF has arrived. 'Incoming!' Prime Minister! I have the Chancellor's letter of resignation. That type of scenario might seem far-fetched, but it is the trajectory the country is travelling. Unemployment is already up 10pc since Labour came to power, and sadly there's no reason to believe this trend will be reversed. Since 'modern' records began, in 1971, every Labour government has left office with unemployment higher in percentage and absolute numbers than when it took power. Reeves is continuing that tragic tradition. The spending statement from Rachel Reeves was not so much a review as a litany of unfunded spending commitments aimed not at reassuring the markets, but at reassuring Labour backbenchers. The brighter among them will not buy it. They will soon notice the important numbers getting worse every month as the full effect of the employers' National Insurance increase, the lowering of the threshold to start paying it and the increase in the minimum pay rates costs jobs and halts hiring. What does this all mean for people trying to get by: the savers, pensioners and those running their own businesses? It means that tax rises are not just inevitable in October's Budget, they will become a must-do if an embarrassing bail out is to be avoided. Labour likes to talk of having ended austerity – something that Philip Hammond, former Conservative chancellor, first claimed back in 2017. The truth of it is the UK has never had real austerity this century. The direction of travel of our public spending has always been up. When you hear of spending cuts, what you are being told about is cuts to the rate of increase in government spending, not a cut in the total amount of spending, which continues to rise year-on-year. Increasing taxes means an attack on our pensions, our savings and our properties. The tax hikes will be passed off as necessary to save the NHS when the NHS really requires an overhaul that boosts its productivity. The much hyped increases for the NHS of £29bn each year over the next three years is most likely to be eaten up by rising pay awards. The NHS is one of the world's largest employers, with around 1.3 million full-time equivalent staff in England (as of February 2024). Consequently, the wage bill for the NHS makes up a substantial proportion of its budget. Nurses are already being balloted about strike action over an 3.6pc inflation-busting pay offer – junior doctors are also wanting more again. In 2022-23, the total cost of employing the staff in the NHS was £71bn – 45.6pc of the NHS budget. These statistics don't include salaries for GPs (who are not directly employed by the NHS), nor employees in the Department of Health and Social Care and other national bodies, such as NHS England. GPs and GP practice staff are indirectly funded by the NHS through a complex system of contracts. The Resolution Foundation think tank estimates that, by the end of the decade, half of all public spending will be going to the NHS – and continuing to rise. So optimistic has Reeves been about 'fixing the foundations' and 'delivering growth' while 'making the right choices', that there will be no way back for the Chancellor when the next crisis begins. The next time someone shouts 'incoming!' in the Treasury, everyone had better duck under their desks. It will be to announce a new Chancellor.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store