European Officials Warn Trump Against Leaving NATO As US Weighs Its Own Priorities

Officials in nations bordering Russia urged President Donald Trump not to retreat from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), arguing that America still has too much at stake in Europe even as Trump grows increasingly frustrated with the alliance and its response to Iran.

In mid-May, the Caller visited countries bordering Russia to ask officials about Trump’s accusations that NATO states are failing to fulfill their duties and his threats to pull U.S. support from Europe. Transportation and lodging for the trip were sponsored by a group of those states.

The officials made their case as Trump, after what he viewed as a belated response from European allies to the war with Iran, spent several weeks threatening to pull out of NATO, the alliance formed in 1949 as a bulwark against the Soviet Union.Trump has called NATO a useless “paper tiger,” a “severely weakened and extremely unreliable” partner, threatened to pull out of the organization altogether and withdrew thousands of troops from Germany in early May.

Most recently, on May 14, the U.S. Department of War canceled the rotation of 4,000 troops into Poland, the NATO country bordering Russia, Ukraine and Belarus.

Polish Deputy Foreign Minister Marcin Bosacki told the Caller in Warsaw, hours after the announcement, that the Pentagon’s decision was logistical and that he does not believe the U.S. plans to reduce troops or capabilities in Poland.

However, The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the Pentagon would pause all troop deployments into the country.

In a statement, the Pentagon said it “will determine the final disposition of these and other U.S. forces in Europe based on further analysis of U.S. strategic and operational requirements, as well as our allies’ own ability to contribute forces toward Europe’s defense.”

Bosacki acknowledged that U.S. policy is not Eurocentric, but said Poland wants consistency and open communication so European allies can work with America as it reduces its footprint across the continent.

Bosacki also pushed back against Trump’s rhetoric that NATO had failed to take appropriate action in Iran, saying it was obvious Trump’s operation was “not a NATO war.”

The deputy foreign minister said nobody in NATO had been asked, officially or unofficially, to get involved in strikes on Iran or in the opening of the Strait of Hormuz.

“To say NATO failed,” Bosacki said, “is just pure nonsense.”

Bosacki said that while the U.S. is pursuing its policy goals in Iran, Poland and other Eastern European countries are focused on the “national priority bordering existence” posed by Russia’s expansionist regime.

He added that those countries are focused on deterring Russian aggression through strengthening border security, supporting Ukraine and fending off Russia’s “hybrid efforts,” including drone attacks, assassinations and cyberattacks.

Bosacki also warned that too much focus on Iran could draw attention away from Russia and diminish weapon stockpiles that could be sent to Ukraine.

Officials from Estonia, a former Soviet state, were a bit more sympathetic to Trump’s Iranian campaign, telling the Caller that a war with Iran is an extension of the conflict already rising against Russia: a war on multiple fronts.

Wearing a lapel pin showing unfurled Estonian and Ukrainian flags, Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Marko Mihkelson tied Estonia’s fate to Ukraine’s survival and linked the war there to Trump’s operation in Iran.

“I argue that the best possible way to bring stability and peace back to the Middle East is to push Russians out of Ukraine,” Mihkelson said. “Or to make sure that their strategy goals are not going to be fulfilled.”

Mihkelson said his committee determined it would be willing to join the cause if the U.S. asked for help, noting that Estonians have fought and died alongside U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“If we are not there for allies, how can we ask our allies to come and help us if we need them?” Mihkelson told the Caller.

He admitted he is now more optimistic about NATO after previously diagnosing it as “fragile” following Trump’s remarks earlier this year about taking Greenland from Denmark.

Now, Mihkelson argues NATO is still being “challenged,” but those challenges are coming from Russia, not from within the alliance.

“It’s obvious that European nations must ramp up their defense expenditures, like we do,” Mihkelson said, pointing to Estonia spending 5.4 percent of their annual GDP in defense, the highest of any NATO country. “But at the same time, I think it would be strategically suicidal also for America to turn back to Europe.”

Estonian Foreign Ministry Secretary General Jonatan Vseviov also stressed the necessity of a united NATO.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Estonia joined NATO in 2004 in what Vseviov described as an attempt to “tie ourselves down to the ship as solidly as possible.”

“If the ship goes down, the ship goes down, but it’s not going to leave without us,” Vseviov said.

He boasted that, with the help of U.S. troops and Estonia’s own defense forces, the country has been able to create a “fairly credible deterrence posture here,” despite what he described as Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ambitions for a reunified Soviet Union, with countries like Estonia serving as buffer states between Russia and the West.

Vseviov said Estonia’s support for Ukraine, another 0.25 percent of its GDP, is an investment in its own defense and border security, while acknowledging that fending off Russia is a “primarily European problem.”

“Europe will have to carry the bulk of the weight. Obviously, we hope the U.S. will contribute, but we recognize that it’s our task,” he said.

“NATO membership should be seen as an opportunity, not as a self-fulfilling prophecy,” the secretary general said, adding that now that Finland and Sweden are members, “we can take the practical defense in this region to a totally different level.”

Director General of the Euro-Atlantic Department at the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Sari Rautio, told the Caller in Helsinki that she also believes in a “more European NATO,” defined as European countries developing their own capabilities instead of relying on the U.S.

“I would say that all European countries are very committed, first of all, to our joint alliance, NATO,” Rautio said.

However, she emphasized that Finland’s military capabilities are designed specifically for defending the country’s border with Russia.

Finland shares more than half of the border between Russia and NATO, stretching from the Arctic to the Baltic Sea.

Finnish Minister of Defence Antti Häkkänen told the Caller that Finland’s navy is “tailor-made” for defense in the Baltic and Arctic and would not be especially useful in the Strait of Hormuz.

Häkkänen said the West has recently forgotten about the need to secure the Arctic, which he said houses many of Russia’s most strategic nuclear and long-strike capabilities that are aimed directly at the U.S. — what he called a “threat [to] U.S. homeland security.”

Häkkänen also warned that Russia is building infrastructure near the Finnish border and preparing for a larger confrontation with the West.

His men have also been fending off Russian “hybrid warfare” against sensitive infrastructure in the Baltics as Russian shadow fleets pass through. He added that Russia is actively preparing for a larger confrontation with the West.

For this reason, Finnish Minister for Foreign Affairs Elina Valtonen said she hopes that, “for the future of humankind,” Trump does not pull the U.S. out of NATO.

She said NATO would crumble if Russia doubted America’s commitment to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which requires member states to defend allies under attack.

However, in agreement with Poland, Valtonen said she would keep “what is happening in the Middle East now” separate from NATO.

She said Trump had not consulted with NATO allies before striking Iran and should not conflate any bilateral alliances between European states and the U.S. with an issue involving NATO as a whole.

“I think sometimes it is that President Trump, when he speaks about NATO, speaks about Europe, but Europe, NATO, was two different things,” Valtonen told the Caller with a laugh.

Representatives from each of these countries told the Caller that although Trump’s focus may be on dealing with Iran, turning his back on NATO would only embolden their shared enemies and could lead the U.S. to face Tehran, Moscow, and possibly Beijing alone.