The recent Nato summit in Ankara has once again highlighted the unpredictable and capricious nature of US President Donald Trump's foreign policy. His volatile performance, characterized by sudden shifts in tone and behavior, has left allies and observers alike grappling with the implications. While some attribute his behavior to personal chemistry with host President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, others point to a deeper strategic indecision within the US.
Trump's relationship with Nato has long been strained, with him deriding the alliance as a "paper tiger" and accusing it of "ripping off" the US. However, at the summit, he seemed to change his tune, praising Nato and its members for their contributions to defense spending. This sudden shift in attitude, described as "mercurial" and "whiplash" by the media, raises questions about its underlying causes and long-term effects.
One possible explanation lies in Trump's affinity for Erdoğan, a strongman leader who has held power for 23 years. Trump's admiration for Erdoğan, despite his Islamist political roots, may have played a role in stabilizing the situation and ensuring that the theatrics didn't spill over into the summit. Trump's chemistry with Erdoğan, who has been labeled an autocrat by domestic opponents, may have influenced his behavior.
However, the extravagant flattery bestowed upon Trump by Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte, a former Dutch prime minister, also played a significant role. Rutte's "Trump whisperer" role, adapting his natural garrulousness to praise Trump for "saving" Nato by getting European allies to raise their defense spending, may have contributed to Trump's sudden shift in attitude.
Trump's remarkable public change of heart towards Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whom he had previously viewed as a "bête noire," may also be fueled by disappointment in Russian President Vladimir Putin's lack of concessions to help end the conflict in Ukraine. Additionally, Trump's awareness of sentiments in the US Congress, which had paid little heed to his other affairs, may have influenced his behavior.
Despite the unexpectedly emollient finale, some believe that Trump's regular bashing of allies will leave a permanent mark, even if he is eventually replaced by an administration with a more traditional view of the transatlantic alliance. However, others argue that Trump's rhetorical hostility has not weakened or undermined the alliance, despite a loss of European trust in US support.
In the end, Trump's capricious behavior at the Nato summit raises deeper questions about US strategic indecision and the future of the transatlantic alliance. As analysts predict, Nato will likely become a more Europe-led alliance as US partners make good on their commitment to spend 5% of GDP on defense by 2025. However, Europeans will continue to be "freaked out" by Trump's hostile language, and the US will remain in a period of political dysfunction, making it difficult for allies to rely on US support.
In my opinion, Trump's behavior at the Nato summit is a symptom of a larger problem within the US foreign policy establishment. The collapse of the political center and the swing from one grand strategy to another have created an environment of uncertainty and indecision, which will have lasting implications for US allies and global security.
