United States

Photo Source: New York Times
   NIAS Course on Global Politics
National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS)
Indian Institute of Science Campus, Bangalore
For any further information or to subscribe to GP alerts send an email to subachandran@nias.res.in

CWA # 41, 14 July 2018
United States
Trump and the NATO: One Block, Different Views

  Sourina Bej

What does Trump’s statement at NATO mean for future of the Atlantic Alliance? Will Trump stand by his NATO commitment during his visit to Russia? Lastly, how did the stranger ties with the US bring out the fractures in EU to the fore?

Sourina Bej is a Research Associate at the International Strategic and Security Studies Programme (ISSSP), at NIAS.

At the recently concluded NATO summit held during 11-12 July, the faultlines in the bilateral relation between Europe and US were too stark to guise under the joint statement signed after the meet.

What does Trump’s statement at NATO mean for future of the Atlantic Alliance? Will Trump stand by his NATO commitment during his visit to Russia? Lastly, how did the stranger ties with the US bring out the fractures in EU to the fore?

The anticipation was there well ahead of the NATO summit. The European officials got together quickly before the summit to avoid yet another G7 fiasco. The debacle was averted but President Trump’s outright criticism of the alliance members on their defence spending and energy policy didn’t go well with the European countries, especially Germany. Present Trump is on a seven-day three-nation tour wherein he will visit UK and Russia following the NATO summit in Brussels.

Trump: Still a NATO Sceptic

Lashing out at the members for its declining defence spending at NATO, Trump singled out Germany in his speech for being “the largest country in EU and paying just 1percent of its GDP for defence.”  

Like past US Presidents, Trump has maintained the rhetoric: EU has a dwindling contribution in NATO and the subsequent overarching burden to maintain the Atlantic alliance has fallen on the US. However, it is Trump’s reactionary behaviour and often skewed view that has made him dismiss the EU during his presidential election campaign, praise UKIP (Britain’s anti-EU independence party) and supported Boris Johnson (resigned as foreign secretary over Brexit a day before Trump’s visit). The consequence of such behaviour has been fear of stoking of right-wing forces in Europe which have fractured the nationalist debate in EU currently.

During his visit to NATO last year in May, Trump had berated European leaders for letting in refugees and for not meeting their two per cent defence-spending target. Hence it didn’t come as a surprise that his criticism on that front to NATO was persistent and equally harsh. In addition, his failure to endorse Article 5 of the Atlantic Charter has cemented the doubt of his commitment to the collective defence of Europe against any threat.  

Along with the doubt about Trump’s commitment to Europe, another consequence of his behaviour has been a fear that he will offer concessions to NATO’s main adversary, Russia. The allies’, especially the Baltic nations, worry that Trump’s combative and often unpredictable foreign policy is aiding Russia’s expansionist agenda. Trump, has so far, being benign on commenting on Russia. Rather he has called Germany captive to Russia for its natural gas needs. Trump was making reference to the March deal between Berlin and Moscow to construct the Nord Stream 2 pipeline through its waters that has caused a stir among many East European countries which will be gas starved.

Bringing China and Europe together?

President Trump’s statement at NATO is an addition to the episode of trade wars with Canada, Mexico, European Union and China. Apart from raising the fear that Trump’s action will undermine the entire multilateral trading system, the unpredictability of US has brought Asia and European markets together when it comes to macroeconomic engagements and investments. Hence it isn’t a surprise that on 16 July when Trump meets Putin, EU leaders will attend the 20th China-EU high summit in Beijing to discuss the international trade order at stake.

Since the BRI was kick-started by China, an apprehension of the debt trap and cautious approach towards China has been adopted by the European countries.

However when the US’s imposed a tariff on aluminium and steel imports, the core of the European market economy, EU will be left with two options; first, to look for more integrated export markets outside of US and second, a better integration within the EU nations themselves. Hence with Chinese facing a similar imposition, a gradual strengthening of economic ties could flourish. Secondly, unlike the US, with China EU doesn’t run the risk of any security competition. Nor does China see a heaving of Europe in the Asia Pacific waters.

Based on the recent statement of US at NATO, Europe is more likely to take stock on defining its allies over foes. In this context, China will play a role in dictating the market and strategic terms.     

Fractures within EU?

A stark observation that could be made from the NATO summit is that no concerted European voice was heard against Trump for his statements. While Trump lashed against the EU and NATO, a single united European voice against the US was lacking. The reasons could be two folds: first, each EU countries were seen safeguarding their individual interest with the US or second, it brings to the fore the fractured nature of EU polity under their integrated market. The protectionist policy of the US has forced the Europeans to face a problem- their massive current account surplus.  As several EU economic observers put it, the current account surplus has been the result of internal imbalances furthered by bad policy choices during the Euro crisis of 2009.

When the 2009 Euro crisis hit the less -developing European countries they were asked to adopt policy choices like German to stay afloat in the market. Countries had to cut costs, boost competitiveness and implement austerity measures. In short, imports fell and exports rose. With the trade balance that improved, the surplus within each country was not equitably distributed as there are no structures in place to monitor those.

Apart from economic structural needs in EU, Trump’s support to select right-wing forces and open statements on Brexit has plunged the individual country itself into debates over protectionism and more market integration.      

It would be interesting to see how Trump manages his commitments after NATO. China’s role in Europe could also figure in the discussion as both the US and Russia are worried about China’s expanse in Central Asian and East European neighbourhood.

Print Bookmark

PREVIOUS COMMENTS

NIAS Global Politics Database
March 2024 | CWA # 1251

NIAS Africa Team

Africa This Week
NIAS Global Politics Database
February 2024 | CWA # 1226

NIAS Africa Team

Africa This Week
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1189

Hoimi Mukherjee | Hoimi Mukherjee is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Political Science in Bankura Zilla Saradamani Mahila Mahavidyapith.

Chile in 2023: Crises of Constitutionality
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1187

Aprajita Kashyap | Aprajita Kashyap is a faculty of Latin American Studies, School of International Studies at the Jawaharlal Nehru University New Delhi.

Haiti in 2023: The Humanitarian Crisis
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1185

Binod Khanal | Binod Khanal is a Doctoral candidate at the Centre for European Studies, School of International Studies, JNU, New Delhi.

The Baltic: Energy, Russia, NATO and China
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1183

Padmashree Anandhan | Padmashree Anandhan is a Research Associate at the School of Conflict and Security Studies, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangaluru.

Germany in 2023: Defence, Economy and Energy Triangle
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1178

​​​​​​​Ashok Alex Luke | Ashok Alex Luke is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Political Science at CMS College, Kottayam.

China and South Asia in 2023: Advantage Beijing?
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1177

Annem Naga Bindhu Madhuri | Annem Naga Bindhu Madhuri is a postgraduate student at the Department of Defence and Strategic Studies at the University of Madras, Chennai.

China and East Asia
The War in Ukraine
October 2023 | CWA # 1091

Annem Naga Bindhu Madhuri

Issues for Europe
IPRI Quarterly Forecasts I Triggers, Trends, and Trajectories
July 2023 | CWA # 1012

Bibhu Prasad Routray

Myanmar continues to burn
2022: The World This Year
December 2022 | CWA # 879

Padmashree Anandhan

The Ukraine War
Europe: Heatwaves, Wildfires, Droughts, and Ice Melt in Alps
November 2022 | CWA # 838

Rishma Banerjee

Tracing Europe's droughts
NIAS Africa Weekly
March 2022 | CWA # 705

NIAS Africa Team

In Focus: Libya
The World This Week: 150th Issue
December 2021 | CWA # 630

GP Team

Europe in 2021
Pakistan Reader
October 2021 | CWA # 588

Abigail Miriam Fernandez

TLP is back again
NIAS Fortnightly on Science, Technology & International Relations
August 2021 | CWA # 528

STIR Team

Space Tourism
Science, Technology and International Relations
September 2019 | CWA # 162

Lakshman Chakravarthy N

5G: A Primer
South Asia Monthly Brief (Nov 2018)
December 2018 | CWA # 71

Mahesh Bhatta | Centre for South Asian Studies, Kathmandu

Nepal
South Asia Monthly Brief (Nov 2018)
December 2018 | CWA # 70

Nasima Khatoon | Research Associate, ISSSP, NIAS

The Maldives
South Asia Monthly Brief (Nov 2018)
December 2018 | CWA # 69

Harini Madhusudan | Research Associate, ISSSP, NIAS

India
South Asia Monthly Brief (Nov 2018)
December 2018 | CWA # 68

Sourina Bej | Research Associate, ISSSP, NIAS

Bangladesh
South Asia Monthly Brief (Nov 2018)
December 2018 | CWA # 67

Seetha Lakshmi Dinesh Iyer | Research Associate, ISSSP, NIAS

Afghanistan