Power, Tariffs, and Patriots

The Hague, June 2025 — This year’s NATO summit took place under the sign of unexpected diplomacy and familiar confrontation. Donald Trump, who arrived in the Netherlands as the sitting president of the United States, changed his tone towards alliance partners, called Volodymyr Zelenskyy a “reliable ally,” and reaffirmed commitments under Article 5. However, behind the politeness came threats to Spain, anger over Pentagon leaks, and a declaration of the need for multibillion-dollar defense spending.

Despite the softer delivery, the content of Trump’s statements remained true to his old style: allies are told to pay more, enemies are threatened with strikes, and criticism of his administration is labeled fake. The summit ended with promises to bolster defense and start new negotiations with Iran — but behind these formulas stood at least four high-profile episodes that defined the tone of the meeting.

Fury over Pentagon report: conflict surrounding Iranian strikes

Even before the summit in The Hague concluded, news feeds were shaken by a leak from the Pentagon: an internal analytical report claimed that the recent U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities had caused only temporary damage. The document allegedly stated that the infrastructure could be restored “within weeks or a couple of months,” and that Iran had suffered almost no strategic losses.

This information prompted a sharp reaction from Donald Trump, who called the leak “fake news” and personally accused journalists of distorting the facts. At the final press conference, the president insisted that the strikes were “devastating,” that they had “completely and utterly destroyed” key facilities, and that the leak was an attempt to discredit the White House. He emphasized: “We took out critical links, and the Iranians know it better than anyone.”

Details of the statement and the timeline of the dispute are outlined in an Associated Press report, which also noted that the White House did not deny the existence of the report, but rejected how it had been interpreted.

A new CIA assessment and Israeli support, claiming the volume of destroyed sites was “significant” and would delay the nuclear program by years, further reinforced the Trump administration’s stance (The Economic Times). At the same time, the CIA confirmed that the Pentagon’s analysis was preliminary and “low-confidence” (The Times).

Meeting with Zelenskyy: “pleasant” diplomacy and a shift in image

On the sidelines of the summit in The Hague, Donald Trump held a short but notable meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Both sides described it as “very pleasant.” Against the backdrop of Trump’s earlier criticism of the scale of U.S. aid to Ukraine, the episode sparked lively discussion in the international press.

According to AP News, the leaders discussed expanding supplies of Patriot air defense systems and the possibility of joint production of strike drones. Official sources noted that the conversation was relaxed, and Trump even praised “the courage of the Ukrainian people.”

At a press conference during an exchange with a journalist from BBC Ukraine, whose husband serves in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Trump said:

“They really want to have these anti-missile systems — they’re called Patriots. And we’ll see if we can make some available. They’re very hard to get. We need them too. We’ve given them to Israel, and they’re 100% effective. It’s hard to believe how effective they are… That’s a very good question, and I wish you the best of luck.”

In a post on X (formerly Twitter), the Ukrainian president emphasized that the goal of the meeting was to “strengthen strategic partnership.” 

Additional attention was drawn by Zelenskyy’s new look: he arrived not in his usual military attire but in a sharp black suit. The British press, including The Sun, described the style shift as a “symbolic gesture,” signaling a move toward a more diplomatic foreign policy approach.

NATO to 5%: new demand and old rhetoric

The main reason for Trump’s trip to the summit was the push to increase NATO defense spending. At the initiative of the U.S., the allies agreed to raise their military budgets to 5% of GDP by 2035 — nearly double the previous 2% benchmark established at the 2014 Wales Summit.

Donald Trump was the key advocate of this increase. As Politico reports, he openly tied NATO funding to “allies’ solvency and loyalty.” Spain’s position sparked particular criticism: the government in Madrid refused to endorse the new commitment. In response, Trump threatened to impose double tariffs on Spanish goods, stating that “you can’t use the shield without paying for it.”

American officials, quoted by AP News, assert that the spending increase is meant to “deter future aggression from Russia,” especially in light of the ongoing war in Ukraine. However, several countries, including Portugal, Belgium, and Italy, expressed doubts about meeting the new targets on schedule.

Trump also highlighted the emotional tone of the diplomacy at a press conference:

“They want to defend their country, and they need the United States — without the U.S., it won’t be the same. … I left The Hague convinced: these people really love their countries. This is not just about siphoning off resources. We’re here to help them protect their homeland.”

Putin and Article 5: a restrained summit finale

Trump’s final press conference in The Hague was perhaps the most restrained of his presidency. For the first time in many months, he explicitly reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to NATO’s Article 5, which guarantees collective defense. “We will stand by if someone is attacked,” he said, adding that the alliance is “stronger than ever.”

At the same time, his comments on Vladimir Putin were clear: “Putin is a tougher partner than anyone expected,” and “he really must stop this war.” Trump added, “I know one thing: he’d like to get out of this — get out of the story. It’s a mess for him.”

Another key phrase that summarized his tone: “Peace is possible — but on the terms of strength, not weakness.” These words reflected the “peace through strength” doctrine that, according to Trump, should guide NATO and U.S. foreign policy. He also noted his intention to initiate direct talks with the Kremlin: “I will speak with Putin soon — we’ll see if we can reach an agreement to end the war.”

Trump mentioned the upcoming negotiations with Iran, scheduled for next week, only briefly, but emphasized that diplomacy remains a “working tool” despite the recent strikes. According to The Times, the tone of the address was less aggressive than in past years, and PBS NewsHour commented that the summit went “surprisingly smoothly” — especially compared to the tense meetings of 2018 and 2020.

Media on the summit: shift in tone, same core message

The reaction of leading international media to the 2025 NATO Summit reflects the ambiguity of the event: on the one hand, Trump demonstrated unexpected diplomacy and even support for the alliance; on the other — he remained committed to criticizing and pressuring allies.

Financial Times highlights the change in tone from the U.S. president: “Trump changed his rhetoric, calling the meeting with Zelenskyy ‘very pleasant’ and Putin a ‘tough partner.’ He also noted progress on Patriot systems and proposed joint mineral extraction.”

→ FT: Donald Trump changes tune on Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Vladimir Putin

Politico focuses on the conflict with Spain: “Trump praised NATO and EU allies while simultaneously threatening Madrid with double tariffs, accusing Spain of refusing to support the alliance’s military goals.”

→ Politico: Trump embraces NATO allies – except for Spain

Associated Press emphasizes the strategic implications: “The U.S. president stated that increased defense spending will help deter Russian aggression and spoke about strikes on Iran and future diplomatic initiatives.”

→ AP News: NATO summit updates

The NATO summit in The Hague confirmed: Donald Trump may adjust his tone, but he remains true to his strategic pressure tactics. Support for the alliance — in words, tariff threats — in action. The meeting with Zelenskyy, remarks on Putin, criticism of Spain, and the Iranian issue — all outlined a new phase of U.S. foreign policy, where allies will have to pay more, and adversaries should expect less.

NATO is growing stronger, but not without reservations. And although Trump’s rhetoric has softened, fundamental divisions within the alliance persist. The next chapter: negotiations with Iran and a possible return to normalization with Russia. For now, the West continues to balance between unity and pragmatism, between numbers and symbols, between The Hague and Geneva.