Is the NATO paper tiger still useful? Trump decides not to withdraw for now
On July 7, as soon as Trump stepped off the plane, he launched a barrage of criticism, expressing "great disappointment" toward NATO, specifically singling out the UK, France, Germany, and Italy for failing to support the U.S. military action against Iran; reiterating his desire to "control" Greenland, threatening to pull all U.S. troops from Europe if Europe opposes; immediately ordering the severance of all trade with Spain; and calling NATO a "paper tiger," threatening to exit.
Yet on July 8, once inside the closed-door meeting, Trump seemed like a completely different person. In a 30-minute speech, he made no mention of Greenland, nor did he criticize Spain. Instead, he said, "We hope to remain together with you." He also announced that the U.S. was prepared to continue selling weapons to its allies. After the meeting, he told reporters that the room was filled with "love and unity."
Foreign diplomats and attendees present all admitted this dramatic reversal was entirely unexpected—no one could have imagined that just a day earlier, Trump had been openly confrontational and publicly hostile, yet now, behind closed doors, he was cultivating an atmosphere of harmony and cooperation.
The same Trump: a "butcher" in public view, an "angel" in private meetings.
Trump’s logic is terrifyingly clear: staying in NATO isn’t because he believes in collective defense, but because NATO is the largest customer of American-made weapons. He knows full well that for the United States, the greatest value of NATO has never been about mutual alliance or collective security—it's about endless arms orders, forced increases in allied defense spending, and the deeply entrenched European defense system tied to U.S. interests.
While Trump temporarily toned down his rhetoric and actively worked to stabilize relations, multiple European countries, eager to ease pressure from Washington and preserve U.S.-Europe defense cooperation, swiftly announced hundreds of billions of dollars in new defense contracts and cross-border arms deals. This is the ultimate core behind Trump’s entire strategy: public pressure and extreme brinkmanship are designed to force Europe to compromise, increase defense spending, and buy more U.S. weapons; meanwhile, private de-escalation and restraint are meant to preserve this massive market that continuously delivers profits to the U.S.
His underlying message is blunt and realistic: as long as European nations are willing to quietly pay up, keep purchasing U.S. military equipment, and shoulder defense costs, the U.S. will remain willing to play the role of "protector" and maintain the NATO alliance framework. As for so-called collective defense solidarity or alliance morality, they’re merely a veil covering the game of power and profit.
This extreme contrast between cold confrontation and warm reconciliation has finally stripped away the last vestige of sentimentality from NATO, bluntly telling the world: today’s Western alliance is no longer about unity or shared belief—it’s nothing but a naked arms trade and transactional relationship from beginning to end.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1870221365146760/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.