Nearly a year ago, NATO Chief Mark Rutte of the Netherlands was excoriated for calling Donald Trump “daddy” in reference to the American president’s “tough talk” on Europe, whether it be on member states’ per capita contributions to the defense pot, or Washington’s demands to “take” Greenland.
This was at a time of course when European leaders believed that appeasing Trump in such ingratiating terms, and in dulcet tones pitched to soothe rather than challenge, was the way to the man’s heart, if not soul. It certainly did not work.
So after Trump’s second attack on Iran in Feb. 28 and the resulting Iranian closure of the Hormuz Strait happened, some Europeans decided to change their tune. In addition to Rutte never again uttering the word “daddy,” the Spanish president Pedro Sanchez closed off the country’s bases to U.S. military access and condemned Trump’s war as a violation of international law. Germany’s Frederich Merz called the Iran War “humiliating” for the U.S. Italy has closed its bases, and UK and French leaders said the U.S. could only use their bases to defend UK and French assets, not to launch operations against Iran.
Meanwhile, Trump looked around and demanded NATO member states help him wrench control of the strait from Iran. Aside from pledging to meet and come up with ideas to secure the strait after the war, no one has complied. To say Trump is agitated and lashing out as a result is an understatement.
The situation has called into question the future of NATO, as the administration has suggested that the alliance is falling down on its Article 5 obligations, which is not true — a member was not attacked and NATO is not an offensive alliance designed to enter wars at members’ behest. Regardless, if the cohesion of NATO was shaky before, some are saying it’s on life support now.
Hellbound and Down 