German media outlets report that Donald Trump is undermining NATO, sowing doubt about the alliance’s commitment to collective defense and prompting concern in Berlin.
Trump Continues to Weaken NATO
The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reports that Trump continues to weaken NATO, with commentators noting a tendency among German politicians to misjudge the situation regarding Trump and the alliance.
These politicians are comforted by the belief that there will be no reduction in American troops in Europe or a US withdrawal from NATO, hoping Congress will restrain Trump and a future president will value the alliance.
Doubt Cast on Deterrence
The FAZ argues this thinking is “formally correct, but misses the point,” as deterrence relies on a potential aggressor believing they will face strong military resistance.
Trump’s questioning of mutual defense – “Why should we help them if they don’t help us?” – has effectively “already half-left NATO,” replacing Article 5 with a transactional approach.
Putin’s Observation and Potential for Attack
According to FAZ, Trump’s statements have likely been carefully noted by Vladimir Putin, increasing the probability that the US will remain on the sidelines if he attacks NATO territory.
Due to Trump’s known “vindictive and memorable” nature, the consequences of this crisis in the alliance will be felt long after any conflict with Iran concludes.
Berlin Urged Not to Dismiss Dispute with Trump
Given Trump’s personal criticism of Friedrich Merz, Berlin should not dismiss the dispute, as Chancellor Scholz previously had stable working relations with the US president.
Germany and other European countries’ offer regarding the Strait of Hormuz is apparently insufficient.
“Europe’s War” vs. “America’s War”
The Sueddeutsche Zeitung writes that NATO is “under heavy fire,” with Donald Trump being the constant attacker.
Trump has been angered by his European allies’ stance that a potential conflict with Iran is not their war.
Europe’s Position Undermines NATO
The commentator notes that this position, while logically sound, is strategically unwise, strengthening Trump’s “deadly dangerous” prejudices against the alliance.
Trump believes that if European NATO countries do not help America, America is not obligated to help Europe.
Trump’s Entrenched Views
Trump repeatedly makes these arguments, indicating they are deeply ingrained in his thinking, rendering rational arguments ineffective.
It is irrelevant that NATO is a defensive alliance, or that it supported the US after 9/11; Trump “lives in his own world of fragments of thought, impulses, prejudices, and contradictions,” operating on a “childish impulse.”
Catastrophic Implications for Deterrence
For NATO, whose deterrence relies on the belief that America will help Europe, this is catastrophic, striking at the heart of the alliance.
Concerns Over Ramstein Air Base
The Rhein-Neckar-Zeitung raises concerns about the legality of a potential war with Iran, as confirmed by Bundestag experts, questioning how long Germany will support Trump and Netanyahu’s actions and allow the use of the Ramstein air base.
The paper asks whether acknowledging these actions as violations of international law doesn’t necessitate ending their tolerance, and if closing the base is necessary.
Need for Stronger Action Than Condemnation
These are not merely legal-theoretical considerations, but politically relevant issues, with the author deeming it unlikely Chancellor Merz will follow the example of the Spanish Prime Minister, who refused the US use of bases in his country.
“Mere condemnation of this war is not enough. International law is indivisible.”