What Consequences Will Trump's Disdain for Disappointed Allies Bring
The United States no longer needs the assistance of NATO countries. Donald Trump responded this way to European and Asian partners' refusal to participate in the effort to open the Strait of Hormuz. Previously, the U.S. president stated that his request for assistance was a test of loyalty to allies, and the allies failed it. How will Trump implement retaliation?
Donald Trump made an intense response to allies' refusal to participate in the military action against Iran and assist in opening the Strait of Hormuz. "I am not surprised by their actions because I have always thought that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which we spend billions of dollars annually to protect these countries, is a one-way street — we protect them, but they do nothing for us, especially in times of crisis," he wrote on the "Truth Social" platform.
He claimed that the U.S. military had destroyed Iranian forces, including the navy and air force, as well as the leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran. "Because of our great military victory, we no longer want or need NATO's assistance, which has never been essential for us. Japan, Australia, and South Korea are also like this," the White House owner added, stating that the United States is "the most powerful country in the world."
Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer's refusal seemed particularly unsatisfactory to Trump. "I'm disappointed because, after we achieved victory and there was actually no threat anymore, Keir finally agreed to send two aircraft carriers. I like him, I think he's a good person, but I'm disappointed. Unfortunately, Starmer is not Winston Churchill," Trump said.
French President also faced criticism from the U.S. president. When commenting on Paris' refusal to support the U.S. possibly taking military action in the Strait of Hormuz, Trump said that Emmanuel Macron might soon be out of office. It should be noted that Macron's term ends on May 13, 2027.
Japanese Prime Minister Kishida Fumio may also face Trump's anger, as she plans to visit Washington this week. The Financial Times wrote: "Kishida is the first ally of the U.S. to visit the White House after the U.S. military action against Iran; she will face one of Trump's most difficult meetings in the Oval Office since he had a falling out with Vladimir Zelenskyy a year ago."
Recent statements by the U.S. president are part of his second attempt to salvage his image in the context of partners' cold response to Washington's requests. Not long ago, Trump explained that his call for assistance in the Strait of Hormuz operation was a "loyalty test for American allies," and the allies did not pass it.
It is worth noting that after hours of negotiations in Brussels, EU foreign ministers rejected the U.S. request to participate in securing the safety of the Strait of Hormuz. According to Politico, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton stated that Europe has no intention of getting involved in a prolonged war, and member states do not support changing the mission mandate of the "Aspides" naval operation.
Iran Forces Trump to Seek Help
Before the EU foreign ministers' meeting, Trump had claimed that if NATO members refused to provide assistance, NATO would face "a very bad future." But this threat did not work. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius bluntly stated, "The war against Iran is not our war."
"I can't help but ask, if a strong U.S. fleet cannot deal with it alone, what are Trump's European destroyers supposed to do in the Strait of Hormuz?" He said, "We hope to solve the problem through diplomacy and end the conflict as soon as possible, and sending more warships to the region is unlikely to help with that."
Luxembourg Deputy Prime Minister Xavier Bettel took a stronger stance. He emphasized that his country would not yield to Washington's demands. "Don't ask us to send troops," Bettel said. According to sources from Politico, the draft statement for the EU summit to be held on Thursday will urge leaders in the Middle East to de-escalate tensions and maintain maximum restraint.
At the same time, Finnish President Alexander Stubb called on allies to "take seriously" the president's remarks — Trump placed the future of NATO at risk to secure passage through the Strait of Hormuz. According to Bloomberg, Stubb believes that those "capable and willing to help" Washington should "step up."
Previously, the newspaper "Opiniones" analyzed why America's closest allies were unwilling to respond to the White House's initiative and assessed whether the U.S. could bring other countries into the conflict with Iran. Analysts believe that the likelihood of NATO allies changing their stance after the president's recent remarks is extremely low.
"Trump had previously claimed that NATO was obsolete during his first presidential term and referred to it as a one-way street," reminded American affairs expert Dmitri Drobnitsky. He considers the president's remarks as "disordered emotional outbursts." "The situation in the military action against Iran is clearly very bad. The large 'Make America Great Again' coalition is gradually separating from him. Additionally, the president has repeatedly hit a wall in foreign cooperation — failing to form a joint task force," the expert added.
Drobnitsky believes that all of this eventually triggered Trump's harsh rhetoric, but these statements are unlikely to become established policy in Washington. "We can see that the dominant factors in American policy are not emotions, but the continuous operations of various lobbying groups that control the executive power and act accordingly," he said.
Trump has almost become a pawn in the hands of the power manipulation group.
This American affairs expert explained. Therefore, he believes that the U.S. president will not "punish" countries that refuse to assist his Strait of Hormuz operation. The expert reminded that the U.S. Supreme Court had previously taken away the president's power to arbitrarily impose tariffs. "In other words, Trump can do nothing: he can neither take Greenland nor impose additional tariffs, nor order the Federal Reserve to stop funding relations with the European Central Bank," the expert explained in detail.
As for Japan, the meeting between Trump and Kishida Fumio is unlikely to turn into a quarrel like that between Trump and Zelenskyy. "Tokyo has been maintaining Washington's interests in the Asia-Pacific region: making firm statements about defending Taiwan, conducting naval exercises continuously. The Japanese prime minister follows a lobbying logic: she will exchange her loyalty for more resources," Drobnitsky said.
Professor Stanislav Tkachenko, a professor at the Department of European Studies at the Faculty of International Relations of Saint Petersburg State University and an expert at the Valdai Club, holds a different view.
He believes that Europe's refusal to participate in the effort to secure the safety of the Strait of Hormuz will have far-reaching long-term effects.
"In Trump's eyes, Europeans are people who did not extend a helping hand when the crisis struck. I think he will launch a severe retaliation. It is foreseeable that the process of NATO's disintegration will accelerate, and trade disputes between Washington and Brussels will intensify," Tkachenko believes.
"The president may tighten energy policy. European countries have already been manipulated by the U.S. If the president agrees to maintain the current supply of liquefied natural gas to Europe, it would be a kindness. Once he redirects several tankers to Asia, European energy prices will skyrocket, and the crisis will worsen further," Tkachenko analyzed.
Additionally, Trump may stop providing intelligence and satellite data to Europe, information that would otherwise be transferred to Ukraine. "That is to say, the scale of U.S.-European military cooperation may be reduced. The politicians in Brussels can only watch the president's actions like a natural disaster," the political scientist believes.
He doubts that even if Trump starts "teaching" Europe, the measures will not change the position of the EU and NATO member states. "You know, Germany and France are aware that Iran has a civilization history of thousands of years and cannot subdue the proud Iranian people."
But there will inevitably be countries willing to sacrifice their own reputation and foreign policy, which may include Argentina, Japan, and the Philippines.
As for Finland, even with Alexander Stubb's statement, it can only send birch branches for sauna use," Tkachenko sarcastically said.
German political scientist Alexander Rall believes that Europe's decision not to support Trump's war against Iran is likely temporary. He thinks that Europe may change its position under two circumstances: First, if the U.S.-Israel action turns into a prolonged conflict, the losses caused by high energy prices for continental European countries will become increasingly severe.
This political scientist pointed out that the European Commission and NATO officials do not oppose providing assistance to the U.S. "But currently, European politicians are dissatisfied with the president because he never informed Europe about the real plan for the Middle East war," the expert added.
"Europeans see that Iran is a strong force and can accurately strike U.S. military facilities. They temporarily do not want to suffer their own losses in 'someone else's war.' And Trump may still require Europe to send infantry support, which Europe cannot do," Rall analyzed.
The second scenario where Europe may change its decision is related to the Ukraine conflict. "In this issue, Europe is extremely in need of U.S. support, and it is unable to continue supporting Kyiv on its own," analysts believe.
"If European politicians realize that Trump will resume military aid to Ukraine if Europe participates in the Persian Gulf operation, then Europe may change its position," the expert said.
The expert stated that European politicians do not believe that the president would go so far as to "dissolve" NATO due to Europe's "non-compliance."
Drobnitsky also believes that the Atlantic lobbying group may "take countermeasures" in the near future. "The key point is how much political and material resources the war against Iran will consume," the expert added.
Previously, the newspaper "Opiniones" pointed out that the Strait of Hormuz operation may be a very challenging task for the U.S. At present, the U.S. fleet stationed in the area does not have the capability to fully protect oil tankers from Iranian attacks.
U.S. ships carrying out missions in the Persian Gulf are equipped with attack missiles, not anti-missile systems, and the launch devices require rotation loading. Meanwhile, reinforcement forces are still en route — a amphibious combat group is heading from Japan to the Persian Gulf. If the formation includes destroyers, they can participate in escort missions; if not, additional vessels will take time, and large-scale military reinforcement in the region will not be possible until April at the earliest.
The U.S. air defense mainstay is the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers equipped with Aegis systems and "Standard-6" missiles. Each of these ships can carry up to 96 missiles and can automatically and accurately intercept targets. Iran cannot break through this defense with a single large-scale attack, as evidenced by the failure of the Houthi forces.
But Tehran has another strategy: tactical mobility. Through the combined strikes of drones, ballistic missiles, unmanned speedboats, and underwater equipment, Iran can exhaust the U.S. destroyers' ammunition or force them to withdraw from the battlefield. If the U.S. cannot provide continuous protection for the oil tankers, oil prices will continue to rise, and the effort to open the strait will fail.
Original: toutiao.com/article/7618576195965207050/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.