Trump casts doubt on NATO solidarity, despite it aiding the US after Sept. 11

NATO military forces during static display after "Exercise Steadfast Dart 2025" at the Smardan Training Area in Smardan, Romania, on February 19, 2025. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 07 March 2025
Follow

Trump casts doubt on NATO solidarity, despite it aiding the US after Sept. 11

  • Trump also suggested that the US might abandon its commitments to the alliance if member countries don’t meet defense spending targets
  • Last year, NATO’s Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said a record 23 of NATO’s 32 member nations had hit the military alliance’s defense spending target

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump on Thursday expressed uncertainty that NATO would come to the US’s defense if the country were attacked, though the alliance did just that after Sept. 11 — the only time in its history that the defense guarantee has been invoked.
Trump also suggested that the US might abandon its commitments to the alliance if member countries don’t meet defense spending targets, a day after his pick for NATO ambassador assured senators that the administration’s commitment to the military alliance was “ironclad.”
Trump’s comments denigrating NATO, which was formed to counter Soviet aggression during the Cold War, are largely in line with his yearslong criticism of the alliance, which he has accused of not paying its fair share toward the cost of defense. But they come at a time of heightened concern in the Western world over Trump’s cozy relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has long seen NATO as a threat, and as the US president seeks to pressure Ukraine into agreeing to a peace deal with the country that invaded it three years ago.




US President Donald Trump reacts at the Oval Office at the White House in Washington on March 6, 2025. (REUTERS)

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth sent the alliance into upheaval last month when he said in a speech that the US would not participate in any peacekeeping force in Ukraine, which is not a NATO member, and would not defend any country that participated in it if attacked by Russia.
Trump said Thursday in the Oval Office that other countries would not come to the defense of the US — though they have done exactly that, in the only instance that the Article 5 defense guarantee was invoked.
“You know the biggest problem I have with NATO? I really, I mean, I know the guys very well. They’re friends of mine. But if the United States was in trouble, and we called them, we said, ‘We got a problem, France. We got a problem, couple of others I won’t mention. Do you think they’re going to come and protect us?’ They’re supposed to. I’m not so sure.”
Article 5 was invoked after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, leading to NATO’s largest operation in Afghanistan. France’s military participated in the operation.
“We are loyal and faithful allies,” French President Emmanuel Macron responded Thursday, expressing “respect and friendship” toward US leaders.
“I think we’re entitled to expect the same,” he said.
Macron invoked “centuries-old history,” namechecking the Marquis de Lafayette, a 19-year-old French nobleman, who was a major-general in the American Continental Army during the Revolutionary War, and Gen. John Pershing, commander of the American army in France during World War I. Macron added that a few days ago, he met American World War II veterans who landed on Omaha Beach as part of the D-Day invasion of Nazi-occupied France.
France and the US “have always been there for each other,” Macron said.




France's President Emmanuel Macron gestures as he addresses the media during a press conference in Brussels on March 6, 2025, to discuss continued support for Ukraine and European defense. (AFP)

When asked Thursday if it he was making it US policy that the US would not defend NATO countries that don’t meet military spending targets, Trump said, “well, I think it’s common sense, right? If they don’t pay, I’m not going to defend them. No, I’m not going to defend them.”
Trump has suggested since his 2016 presidential campaign that the US under his leadership might not comply with the alliance’s mutual defense guarantees and would only defend countries that met targets to commit 2 percent of their gross domestic products on military spending.
The US is the most powerful nation of the seven-decade alliance, has the largest economy among members and spends more on defense than any other member.
The US was one of 12 nations that formed NATO following World War II to counter the threat posed by the Soviet Union to Western European during the Cold War. Its membership has since grown to 32 countries, and its bedrock mutual defense guarantee, known as Article 5, states that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all.
Trump on Thursday also seemed to suggest the US commitment to NATO might be leveraged in his trade war as he seeks to target what he says are unfair trade policies with other nations, including the European Union.
“I view NATO as potentially good, but you’ve got to get, you’ve got to get some good thinking in NATO. It’s very unfair, what’s been happening,” Trump said. “Until I came along, we were paying close to 100 percent of NATO. So think of it, we’re paying 100 percent of their military, and they’re screwing us on trade.”
On Wednesday, Trump’s choice for NATO ambassador, Matt Whitaker, said at his confirmation hearing that in regards to the US commitment to the NATO alliance and specifically Article 5, “It will be ironclad.”
Last year, NATO’s Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said a record 23 of NATO’s 32 member nations had hit the military alliance’s defense spending target.
Trump has taken credit for countries meeting those targets because of his threats, and Stoltenberg himself has said Trump was responsible for getting other nations to increase their spending.
 


Australia passes tougher laws on guns, hate crimes after Bondi shooting

Updated 4 sec ago
Follow

Australia passes tougher laws on guns, hate crimes after Bondi shooting

  • The gun control laws passed with the support of the Greens party despite opposition from the opposition conservative Liberal-National coalition
  • The anti-hate laws passed with support from the Liberal party

SYDNEY: Australia has enacted new laws for a national gun buyback, tighter background checks for gun licenses and a crackdown on hate crimes in response to the country’s worst mass shooting in decades at a Jewish festival last month.
Two bills for stricter gun control and anti-hate measures passed the House of Representatives and Senate late on Tuesday during a special sitting of parliament.
The gun control laws passed with the support of the Greens party despite opposition from the opposition conservative Liberal-National coalition. The anti-hate laws passed with support from the Liberal party.
Introducing the gun reforms, Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said individuals with “hate in their hearts and guns in their hands” carried out the December 14 attack at the famed Bondi Beach that killed 15 people.
“The tragic events at Bondi demand a comprehensive response from government,” Burke said. “As a government we must do everything we can to counter both the motivation and the method.”
The father and son gunmen allegedly behind the attack ⁠on Jewish Hanukkah celebrations used powerful firearms that were legally obtained, despite the son being previously examined by Australia’s spy agency.

PARLIAMENT RECALLED EARLY FOR SPECIAL SESSION
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese recalled parliament early from its summer break for this week’s special two-day session to toughen curbs after a shooting that shocked the nation and prompted calls for more action on gun control and antisemitism.
The proposed gun control measures enable the largest national buyback scheme since a similar campaign after a 1996 massacre in Tasmania’s Port Arthur, in which a lone gunman killed 35 people.
They also toughen firearm import laws as well as background checks for firearm licenses issued ⁠by Australian states, making use of information from the Australian Security Intelligence Organization.
Australia had a record 4.1 million firearms last year, the government said on Sunday, with more than 1.1 million of those in New South Wales, its most populous state and the site of the Bondi attack.
“The sheer number of firearms currently circulating within the Australian community is unsustainable,” Burke said.
The bill passed without the support of the opposition coalition, with a vote of 96-45 in the lower house, and 38-26 in the Senate.
“This bill reveals the contempt the government has for the million gun owners of Australia,” said Shadow Attorney-General Andrew Wallace of the Liberals.
“The prime minister has failed to recognize that guns are tools of trade for so many Australians.”

HATE CRIME PENALTIES STEPPED UP
A second bill steps up penalties for hate crimes, such as jail terms up to 12 years when a religious official or preacher is involved, and allows bans on groups deemed to spread hate.
The bill, ⁠which also provides new powers to cancel or refuse visas for those who spread hate, passed the lower house by a 116-7 margin and the Senate 38-22.
It won support from Liberal party lawmakers after ruling Labor struck a deal to include changes such as a requirement the government consult the opposition leader on the listing and delisting of extremist organizations.
The Liberals’ coalition partners abstained from the vote and the Greens opposed it, arguing it would have a “chilling effect” on political debate and protest.
“This bill targets those that support violence, in particular violence targeted at a person because of their immutable attributes,” said Attorney-General Michelle Rowland.
Such conduct is not only criminal but sows the seed of extremism leading to terrorism, she added. Police say the alleged Bondi gunmen were inspired by the Daesh group.
The measures were originally planned for a single bill, but backlash from both the coalition and the Greens forced the government to split the package and drop provisions for an offense of racial vilification.
In its own reforms, New South Wales limits individuals to possession of four guns, and beefs up the power of police to curb protests during designated terrorist attacks.