Trump’s speech was scolding and ignorant, avoiding a US pledge to commit to collective security, adding force to rumors Russia has influenced him

Donald Trump’s failure to make an explicit commitment to Nato’s article 5, the mutual defence obligation at the heart of the alliance, has prolonged the uncertainty among US allies about Washington’s intentions.

Trump rebukes Nato leaders for not paying defence bills Read more

Both the US press and the diplomatic corps in Washington had been primed to expect some clear language showing that the president believed in the principle of collective defence, that an attack on one is an attack against all. Trump has hitherto indicated that US preparedness to come to the defence of an ally might be dependent on how much that ally spends on its military. He had gone as far as calling the alliance “obsolete”, although he has since said that ceased to apply since he became president.

Against that background, administration officials were briefed ahead of Trump’s long-awaited speech at Nato’s new headquarters that it would have clear vocabulary on the issue.

The anticipation made the disappointment on Thursday all the greater. There was reference in the text to “never forsaking friends” and unnamed White House officials, speaking anonymously, insisted that US commitment to article 5 went without saying.

But for allies – especially on Europe’s borderlands in the shadow of an increasingly assertive Russia – it does not go without saying. They needed to hear it from the president’s own lips and they did not.

Like criticism of Vladimir Putin, a clear commitment to Nato’s collective security remains something that Trump allows his officials to express without ever quite saying the words himself. The doggedness of his refusal to use language that has been commonplace for earlier US administrations, has added force to widespread, persistent reports that Moscow has some form of leverage on the president.

“After calling Nato ‘obsolete’ Trump needed to say what every predecessor since Truman has said: the US is committed to article 5. He didn’t. This is a major blow to the alliance,” a former US ambassador to Nato, Ivo Daalder, wrote in a series of tweets immediately after the speech.

Daalder also pointed out that Trump only briefly mentioned Russia in talking about Nato’s mission, spending much more time on counter-terrorism and immigration. It was unclear what role he expected Nato to play in immigration management.

“Trump’s first Nato meeting was an opportunity to unite the alliance,” Daalder concluded. “Unfortunately, Nato today is more divided than ever.”

It may be have been a coincidence, but it was certainly appeared symbolic, that the leader Trump roughly pushed aside to get to the front row for a Nato photo-opp was Duško Marković, the prime minister of Montenegro, due to become a full member next month, despite a sustained Moscow-backed campaign to prevent that happening. The campaign included an abortive coup attempt.

The dominant tone of Trump’s Nato speech was scolding. He returned to his campaign mantra on Nato, berating US allies of not “paying their dues” to the alliance, suggesting they were in arrears for past years. The vocabulary showed a persistent ignorance about how the alliance works.

In 2014, member states vowed to increase their military spending to 2% of GDP. Most of the 28 allies have not reached that goal yet, and are undoubtedly dragging their heels but the deadline for doing so is 2024. There are no arrears.

Not for the first time, the president was accused of being tone deaf to the backdrop to his speech. In Brussels, he was standing alongside a piece of the World Trade Centre wreckage.

Trump v Macron: French president appears to win latest handshake battle Read more

“Trump’s remarks showed terrible timing,” said Jorge Benitez, a senior fellow at the Brent Scowcroft Centre on International Security. “It is one thing to urge Nato allies to increase defense spending during the private meeting, but it was disgraceful to bring it up in the dedication of a memorial honoring the solidarity of our allies with the US after 9/11. This was a solemn moment to show appreciation for the lives our Nato allies lost fighting for the US, not the time to talk about money.”

Thomas Wright, the director of the Centre on United States and Europe and the Brookings Institution, described the Nato leg of Trump’s European tour as “a policy failure of epic proportions” that “increases the risk that Putin will test him in the years ahead.”

It was not just the words. Trump’s body language (including his shoving of Markovic and his macho hand wrestling with Emmanuel Macron) showed him to be ill at ease among this gathering of allies, especially compared to his evident delight at being flattered by the Saudi royal family. It certainly suggested that gilded palaces and absolute rule were more his scene.