Trump affirms his commitment to Nato's Article 5 pledge for mutual defence
Before landing in the Netherlands on Tuesday, Mr Trump cast doubt on whether the US would abide by Article 5 of the Nato treaty, which calls on all members to defend one another in case of an attack.
But on Wednesday, the US president said he stood with that promise.
'That's why I'm here,' Mr Trump said as he met with Dick Schoof, the prime minister of the Netherlands. 'Why would I be here?'
Meanwhile, the alliance on Wednesday enacted one of the Republican president's chief priorities: a pledge by Nato member countries to increase, sometimes significantly, how much they spend on their defence.
'I've been asking them to go up to 5% for a number of years,' Mr Trump said earlier on Wednesday as he met with Mark Rutte, the alliance's secretary general.
'I think that's going to be very big news.'
The 32 leaders endorsed a final summit statement saying: 'Allies commit to invest 5% of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence- and security-related spending by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective obligations.'
Spain had already officially announced that it cannot meet the target, and others have voiced reservations, but the investment pledge includes a review of spending in 2029 to monitor progress and reassess the security threat posed by Russia.
The boost in spending follows years of Mr Trump's complaints that other countries were not paying their fair share as part of an alliance created as a bulwark against threats from the former Soviet Union.
Most Nato countries, with the key exception of Spain, appeared motivated to bolster their own defences not just by Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine but also, perhaps, to placate Mr Trump.
🆕 NATO Allies have agreed to invest 5% of their GDP annually in defence.
A substantial commitment in response to significant threats to our security#NATOsummit pic.twitter.com/eFgwH3pfrR
— NATO (@NATO) June 25, 2025
As a candidate in 2016, Mr Trump suggested that as president he would not necessarily heed the alliance's mutual defence guarantees outlined in Article 5 of the Nato treaty.
In March this year, he expressed uncertainty that Nato would come to the United States' defence if needed, though the alliance did just that after the September 11 2001 attacks.
On Tuesday, he told reporters aboard Air Force One on his way to The Hague for the summit that whether he is committed to Article 5 'depends on your definition'.
'There's numerous definitions of Article 5. You know that, right?' Mr Trump said.
'But I'm committed to being their friends.'
He signalled that he would give a more precise definition of what Article 5 means to him once he was at the summit.
New Hampshire senator Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, who travelled to The Hague and met with several foreign leaders at the summit, said other countries raised 'understandable questions' about the US commitment to the alliance, 'certainly given President Trump's past statements'.
'We were very strong and reassuring everyone that we are committed to Nato, we are committed to Article 5, we are committed to maintaining troops on the Eastern flank,' said Ms Shaheen, who represented the US Senate with Democratic senator Chris Coons of Delaware.
Mr Trump also vented to reporters before leaving Washington about the actions by Israel and Iran after his announced ceasefire – although on Monday, he said the ceasefire was 'very good'.
After Mr Trump arrived in the Netherlands, news outlets, including The Associated Press, reported that a US intelligence report suggested in an early assessment that Iran's nuclear programme had been set back only a few months by weekend strikes and was not 'completely and fully obliterated', as Mr Trump had said.
But on Wednesday morning, Mr Trump and other senior cabinet officials vigorously pushed back on the assessment, and defence secretary Pete Hegseth said the administration was launching an investigation into who disclosed those findings to reporters.
'That hit ended the war,' Mr Trump said.
Drawing comparisons to the atomic bombings from the US during the Second World War, he added: 'I don't want to use an example of Hiroshima. I don't want to use an example of Nagasaki. But that was essentially the same thing. That ended that war.'
The White House has not said which other world leaders Mr Trump would meet with one on one while in The Hague, but the US president said during his meeting with Mr Rutte that he will meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky later on Wednesday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
SNP's policy of 'unarmed' Armed Forces is sheer madness
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... As the UK yesterday marked Armed Forces Day – described as 'a chance to show your support' for the men and women in the military – SNP ministers will hopefully have been reflecting on their spectacularly bizarre stance on defence spending. While the nationalists have long opposed nuclear weapons, they are not a pacifist party. They support membership of Nato, pledging an independent Scotland would be a 'reliable and dedicated international partner' like Denmark and Norway. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad They also say our domestic defence industry 'will not just be welcome in an independent Scotland but will be a vital part of our ability to have a defence capability that matches an Independent Scotland's needs and threats' and criticise the UK Government for 'a failure to meet Scotland's specific defence needs'. Ukraine needs munitions and so does the British Army (Picture: Sergey Shestak) | AFP via Getty Images 'Russian threat is very real' So it is all the more difficult to understand why it is a 'long-standing position' of the SNP that government funding should not be provided for the 'direct manufacture of munitions'. So, for example, Scottish Enterprise and the Scottish National Investment Bank do not invest in companies that make weapons. Former SNP defence spokesperson Stewart McDonald has now rightly criticised the ban as 'a stupid policy' and called for a new debate. His comments followed a hint by John Swinney that the party's stance could change as 'we are living in a very different context today' and 'the Russian threat is very real'. However a Scottish Government source explained ministers were struggling with how to 'manage' the issue within the party. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But, with the UK set to increase defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP, now is not the time to tip-toe around the subject. Not only is the manufacturing of munitions and weapons vital to defend this country and to help Ukraine fight off the Russian invasion, it is also a major economic opportunity.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
How prepared is Ireland for the knock-on effects of a future war?
Ireland's decision to sign up to the European Union's €150 billion weapons fund was greeted with typical fanfare last Friday when it was announced by Simon Harris. The move, the tanaiste said, would allow Ireland and other countries to streamline the procurement of arms and defence systems. 'I am determined to provide for the development of a full spectrum of Defence Force capabilities that will bring Ireland in line with other similar-sized European countries,' Harris added. Europe is embarking on a mass rearmament because of the worsening security situation on its eastern borders and across the globe. The bloc announced the creation of a €150 billion fund called Security Action for Europe (Safe) in response to Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and the fact that America is no longer a reliable guarantor of European security as it turns its focus instead towards China, where the communist regime is building one of the largest militaries in the world. Defence spending across the EU is surging, with Nato members last week pledging to allocate 5 per cent of their GDP to defence amid rising fears of a potential war on the continent. This marks a sharp increase from last year, when only 23 of the alliance's 32 members were meeting the existing 2 per cent target. For its part, Ireland will spend €1.35 billion on defence this year, up €100 million on 2024, but amounting to only about 0.2 per cent of GDP. Is this enough given Ireland's vulnerability and stated position of neutrality? And is the country prepared for a coming war? The answer to both, in short, is no. Friday's announcement came amid ongoing government efforts to formulate strategies to address a worsening security landscape, compounded by decades of underinvestment in defence. The coalition has also struggled to educate an electorate that often conflates neutrality with protection, overlooking the state's inability to defend itself. Few Irish people think about serving their country by joining the military. The government and the military have promised but failed to revitalise the reserve Defence Forces. It is difficult to exaggerate the scale of the polycrisis facing the tanaiste, who is also the defence minister. Harris faces inertia in both the Department of Defence and the military, which is struggling on almost every front. And like militaries across Europe, the Defence Forces struggle to recruit and keep staff and even to put patrol vessels out to sea. Some of these patrol vessels are confined to port for months. • Alex Massie: It's time Ireland started to pay for its defence As of May 31, there were 7,468 Irish military personnel compared with 9,480 in 2010. Numbers within the Defence Forces have fallen nearly every year between 2010 and 2024. The Air Corps has no combat jets but does have maritime patrol aircraft. The Naval Service has a fleet of vessels but does not have the staff to put all but a few to sea. Crucially, the government and the general staff of the Defence Forces are not battle-hardened. They have no real experience of dealing with a conventional or hybrid attack. There is no single scenario for the outbreak of war in Europe but it could begin with a Russian attack on the continent's eastern borders, though it is more likely to be hybrid in nature with the Kremlin using terrorist groups, cyberattacks and sabotage to try to upturn European society or provide an excuse to take action. However, it could also involve an attack on a weak state such as Ireland, whose isolated location on the EU's western border in the north Atlantic makes it vulnerable. Neutral countries have no protection in war. • 'Ireland must recruit tech workers to counter Russia cyber threat' 'The Atlantic was and will always be challenged by Russia's north Atlantic fleet. If the UK currently feels threatened by Russia, why should we think Ireland is not?' said Riho Terras, an Estonian member of the European parliament and a former military officer. 'If Russia keeps on rearming at its current pace, pretty soon Europe and Nato will not have the ability to handle it. The Kremlin looks for weak spots. It's hard to understand why Ireland thinks it won't be impacted. Europe really does need to stop figure-skating when Putin is playing ice hockey,' Terras added. If a conventional attack were to occur under a dubious pretext, Ireland would be forced to seek assistance from other EU states and Nato as it does not have any capability to defend itself. Before Friday's announcement, the government was already trying to rearm the Defence Forces but struggling to make progress. It has announced the acquisition of sonar and primary radar systems, but this is not new technology and will also take years to become operational. 'We are spending €60 million on new technology we should have bought decades ago. The new maritime patrol aircraft we bought for €250 million have no anti-submarine kits because the department didn't like the sound of anti- submarine warfare equipment,' one retired military officer said. 'The sonar system we have bought has to be towed on a ship but we cannot put naval vessels out to sea. 'It's akin to the gardai celebrating getting flashing blue lights and sirens attached to patrol cars when they have no drivers. Nothing makes any sense,' the source added. 'If war breaks out and Russian submarines are entering our waters to sabotage undersea cables or attack Britain, we are powerless to do anything. This is very similar to the years leading up to the Second World War. We are not at the back of the queue to acquire military equipment — we are not even in the queue.' Like many other announcements on defence, the decision potentially to use the EU Safe fund to acquire arms and military equipment may turn out to be unnecessary. Money is not the issue with increasing Ireland's preparedness; it is decision-making. Ireland's acquisition of new sonar and primary radar was made without EU funding. A decade ago, Ireland signed a similar memorandum of understanding to allow for joint procurement with Britain but did not use it. Terras warned that the Safe programme might not even work. 'No EU country has to use it. If large and important countries like Germany don't use it, Spain and the rest of them won't either. It's a loan facility for those who need it,' he said. The announcement by Harris came amid government moves to restructure oversight of defence. It has announced the formation of a ministerial group, a revamped national security committee and the rebranding of the National Security Analysis Centre (NSAC), set up six years ago to advise the taoiseach on national security. The new group is chaired by Micheál Martin, the taoiseach. Harris attends, as does Jim O'Callaghan, the minister for justice, along with the secretaries-general of the relevant departments, the garda commissioner and the chief of staff of the Defence Forces. It is scheduled to meet every quarter, while the national security committee can meet on a more frequent basis. But many familiar with these entities describe them as 'old wine in new bottles'. The NSAC is widely considered to have been an abject failure. Various iterations of the national security committee took no action to stop the expansion of the Russian embassy when it sought planning permission, essentially to build a spy base in Dublin. Others point out how no action was taken when Russia's intelligence services managed to recruit an agent, codenamed Cobalt, inside the Oireachtas, who still remains in place. Neither Martin, Harris nor O'Callaghan have any real understanding of Russia and its determination to undermine the EU for strategic purposes. Harris is also struggling to overhaul the Department of Defence, though he has been credited with making decisions and pushing ahead with investment projects, often in the face of bureaucratic inertia. 'Harris is making decisions and he's getting projects across the line but he's struggling with the department and the military. He's making the right decisions when something is put in front of him but he's one man trying to reform a dysfunctional system,' one insider said. There are other problems that illustrate Ireland's unreadiness for war in Europe, according to Eoin McNamara, a defence researcher at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs. 'There are now long queues to buy military equipment around Europe, such is the demand because Russia is rearming at exponential speed,' he said. 'Time is not on Ireland's side. Decisions are not being made fast enough. Most countries, if they can't find an ideal defence system, are going for the second-best option, but Ireland isn't doing this.' Unlike other EU states, Ireland has failed to nurture a defence industry, though it urgently needs one. The government and the military have yet to demonstrate any novel thinking in terms of how to use new technologies to defend its citizens. 'Ireland is a small country that needs to think more about technological solutions to defend itself,' said McNamara who noted how Ukraine had shown the world how a country could defend itself through its own resources. Ukrainian-manufactured drones have inflicted the majority of casualties on the battlefield. 'Defence is a driver of innovation. Within Ireland, we could do something similar here and build a fantastic industry around defence technology. We need to recognise what's happening as an opportunity,' said Fintan Buckley of Ubotica Technologies, an Irish defence company specialising in artificial intelligence platforms for satellites. Ubotica's Space:AI system can detect, classify and track vessels, even those operating off the grid, to provide maritime situational awareness from space to seafloor. 'The initial response by the government to what's happening has been about getting more boots on the ground and more boats out to sea, but long term it needs to think about how we embrace technology to provide security to protect our critical infrastructure,' Buckley said. 'We need to foster a closer relationship between our Defence Forces and industry to help foster new technologies. We do this in other industries but we need to do the same with defence.' However, many experts believe that Ireland's greatest security vulnerability — one that arguably leaves it more exposed than its European neighbours — is that Russia, after years of intelligence-gathering in the state, already knows all of the above.
NBC News
2 hours ago
- NBC News
Former chief of staff to late Rep. Gerry Connolly wins Democratic nomination for his seat
The former chief of staff to the late Rep. Gerry Connolly clinched the Democratic nomination to fill Connolly's seat in a deep-blue Northern Virginia district, according to the local Democratic Party. James Walkinshaw won with 59.54% of the vote in Saturday's party-run primary, according to results posted by the 11th Congressional District Democratic Committee of Virginia. He beat a field of 10 candidates that included state Sen. Stella Pekarsky and state Del. Irene Shin in the race for the special election nomination. Shin finished in second place with 14.27% of the vote, while Pekarsky placed third with 13.40%, according to the party's tabulation. Walkinshaw was Connolly's chief of staff from 2009 to 2019 and has served on the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors since 2020. Walkinshaw earned an endorsement from Connolly for this race before he died. He ran a campaign focused on stopping Trump's 'dangerous' agenda, saying he would fight to protect the district's more than 50,000 federal workers. "I'm honored & humbled to have earned the Democratic nomination for the district I've spent my career serving," Walkinshaw said on X. "This victory was powered by neighbors, volunteers, and supporters who believe in protecting our democracy, defending our freedoms, and delivering for working families." The race drew some outside spending, with Walkinshaw receiving over $2.4 million in support from Fight for Virginia's Future and Protect Progress. Save Democracy PAC spent over $160,000 supporting Pekarsky, and People Over Monopolies spent almost $184,000 supporting Shin. Fight for Virginia's Future also spent money on negative ads and robocalls criticizing Pekarsky for supporting a bill that would hold a referendum on a casino in Fairfax County. Walkinshaw will advance to the September special election, where he is the likely favorite to win, as then-Vice President Kamala Harris carried the district by 34 percentage points in 2024. He will face Republican Stewart Whitson, an Army veteran and former FBI official.
