Trump Says Spain Should Be “Thrown Out” of NATO in Defence Spending Clash
In a dramatic escalation of his long-standing campaign for increased military spending among allies, former U.S. President Donald Trump suggested that Spain should be expelled from the NATO alliance. The remarks were made during a meeting with Finland’s President Alexander Stubb, highlighting the deep divisions over defence contributions that continue to define Trump’s approach to the transatlantic pact.
Background: The Root of the Disagreement
The friction between Trump and Spain ignited in June, just prior to a NATO summit. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez publicly declared that Spain would not comply with Trump’s demand for NATO members to raise their defence budgets to 5 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This figure is more than double the alliance’s official benchmark of 2 percent, a target that Spain is working towards but has not yet consistently met.
Trump has built a core part of his foreign policy narrative around criticizing NATO members he accuses of “free-riding” on U.S. military power. His “America First” doctrine consistently emphasizes that allies must “pull their weight” and contribute their fair share to collective defence.
The Oval Office Confrontation
During the meeting with Finland’s president, Trump revisited this theme, singling out Spain as the lone holdout against his proposed 5 percent spending target.
“You have to call them and find why are they a laggard,” Trump stated, addressing the issue of Spain’s refusal. He then escalated his rhetoric significantly, adding bluntly: “Maybe you should throw them out of NATO, frankly.”
Trump reiterated that Spain’s position was “unacceptable” and that he saw “no excuse not to do this,” accusing the country of failing to match the financial commitments of other NATO members who had, in his view, agreed to the higher spending goal.
The Finland Context: A Contrast in Alliances
The primary focus of the meeting between Trump and President Stubb was not Spain, but a major defence deal. The two leaders formally approved a U.S. sale of 11 medium icebreakers to Finland, valued at approximately $6.1 billion, with deliveries scheduled to begin by 2028.
This agreement is a key part of Finland’s strategy to bolster its security following its accession to NATO, particularly given its extensive land border with Russia and the ongoing war in Ukraine. The contrast between the discussion of a multi-billion dollar defence deal with Finland and the threat to expel Spain over spending was stark.
In a lighter moment, Trump joked with President Stubb about his chances of winning a Nobel Peace Prize, citing his claimed success in brokering international deals. Stubb responded cautiously, noting that achieving peace in the Middle East and resolving the Russia-Ukraine war would be critical factors for any such recognition.
Implications and Analysis: A Deepening Rift Within NATO
Trump’s comments represent a significant hardening of his stance towards NATO members who do not meet his spending benchmarks. By publicly floating the idea of expelling a founding member like Spain, he signals a potential zero-tolerance policy should he return to power.
The implications of such rhetoric are profound:
Deepening Divides: This public shaming and threat of expulsion could create deeper rifts within the alliance, undermining the unity that is central to NATO’s deterrent power.
Diplomatic Signal: For Spain and other nations struggling to meet the 2%—let alone a 5%—target, the message is a severe diplomatic reprimand, framing their spending choices as a failure of alliance responsibility.
Symbol of a Broader Policy: The episode underscores that burden-sharing will remain a primary flashpoint in NATO. For Trump, it reinforces his core message that the U.S. will not tolerate allies it perceives as benefiting from American protection without making substantial financial contributions of their own.
This confrontation leaves a critical question hanging over the future of the alliance: will increased pressure lead to higher defence spending, or will it foster resentment and fragmentation that weakens NATO from within?
