Connect with us

News

Most Nato members to hit spending target as alliance braces for potential Trump win

Published

on

Most Nato members to hit spending target as alliance braces for potential Trump win

Most Nato member states will hit the alliance’s defence spending target as it prepares for more Russian aggression and braces for the potential election of Donald Trump.

Eighteen of the US-led military alliance’s 31 members will meet the target of spending 2 per cent of gross domestic product on defence this year, Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said on Wednesday. That includes Germany, Europe’s biggest economy, for the first time.

That equates to Nato’s European members spending a combined total of $380bn on defence, a record amount. “We are making real progress . . . European allies are spending more,” Stoltenberg said.

That number is likely to rise as budgets are adjusted, according to three alliance diplomats. “Nato expects about two-thirds of allies to hit 2 per cent in 2024,” an alliance official said.

Nato’s spending rose markedly after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine but Trump’s term in office in 2017-21 also brought a significant uptick as the US president harangued his European allies for failing to spend enough.

Advertisement

In 2016, only five countries met the target. Today Poland spends 3.9 per cent of GDP on defence, ahead of the US itself on 3.5 per cent. Other countries such as Spain trail, spending just above 1 per cent.

“We have to listen and take note of the following: The criticism that we hear [from Trump] is not primarily about Nato. It is about Nato allies not spending enough,” Stoltenberg said on Wednesday. “And that is a valid point . . . that European allies and Canada have to spend more.”

A declared Nato-sceptic and isolationist, Trump — the presumptive Republican nominee in November’s US presidential election — has previously threatened to withdraw from the military alliance that guarantees Europe’s defence and security.

His rhetoric has continued into the current race for the White House. European leaders were shocked last week when Trump told a campaign rally that he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell they want” with Nato members who fail to meet the target.

As Trump performs strongly in opinion polls against incumbent Joe Biden, he is again causing trepidation at Nato’s headquarters in Brussels.

Advertisement

European diplomats and officials say that continuing their upwards spending trajectory is the first of a three-plank Trump containment strategy.

Second, Nato must pivot to focus more on issues that are most important to Trump, such as containing China or tackling terrorism. Finally, allies understand that they must indulge in flattery and charm to win his admiration.

“There’s a lot of talk about [Trump],” said one senior Nato diplomat. “What is the best way to handle a future President Trump? . . . Basically a combination of flattery and a firm hand.”

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Despite the increased defence spending since Russia invaded Ukraine, the sole guarantor of Europe’s security remains the US commitment to Nato, with no substitute for its 80,000 troops on the continent, the scale and speed of how it can deploy materiel, and its nuclear weapons capability.

“You can’t worry about the rhetoric too much, but instead focus on the points being made and make sure you give credit to Trump if and when he is right,” said Oana Lungescu, Nato’s chief spokesperson from 2010 to 2023.

Advertisement

“His priorities were pretty clear from the start. It’s about identifying those priorities, putting them in the alliance context and making sure that addressing them will strengthen the alliance,” she added.

Trump’s remarks on Russia have “underscored an existing anxiety about the implications of another Trump presidency,” said Ian Lesser, vice-president of the German Marshall Fund. “It could be more difficult on many levels. For one, Europe is now at war. And another Trump administration is likely to be more pointed in many policy areas and more capable of carrying them out.”

Trump’s first Nato summit, in Brussels in 2017, is remembered for the new US president lashing out at his allies for “owing” money to the US, failing to make reference to its Article 5 mutual-defence clause, and making disparaging remarks about the cost of the alliance’s new headquarters.

The following year, leaders spent the summit telling Trump he was the reason they would be increasing their defence spending. The stakes were high: the summit took place just before he flew to Helsinki to meet Russia’s President Vladimir Putin.

“The people have stepped up today like they’ve never stepped up before . . . $33bn more they’re paying,” Trump told reporters after the 2018 summit. “Everybody in the room thanked me. There’s a great collegial spirit in that room that I don’t think they’ve had in many years.”

Advertisement
Donald Trump at Ramstein Air Base in Germany in 2018. He had been reported at the time to be planning to withdraw a quarter of US troops from the country © Andrew Harnik/AP

A year later, Trump’s rhetoric on Nato had softened. He even defended the alliance in 2019, saying it “serves a great purpose” after French President Emmanuel Macron declared it “brain-dead”.

Trump’s sometimes difficult relationship with Macron, and his negative attitude towards Germany, were features of his first presidency that diplomats say could be repeated.

But other Nato leaders may be able to leverage closer relations with his possible administration.

Asked about Trump’s comments this weekend, Hungarian premier Viktor Orbán, a fan of the former US president who has maintained close ties to Putin and has held up EU aid for Ukraine, indicated he was not concerned. “We understand what Mr President said, and we pay our dues,” a spokesperson for Orbán told the FT. Hungary is among the Nato countries spending more than 2 per cent on defence.

Stefano Stefanini, Italy’s former ambassador to Nato, said Trump’s re-election would be a defining moment for Europe’s postwar security order.

“The problem Trump raises . . . is the refusal of America, of Trump’s America, to commit itself to the defence of Europe in case of aggression,” he said. The risk for Nato would be of it fracturing if capitals were individually to seek to curry favour with Trump, he added.

Advertisement

The potential need to mollify Trump is being factored into discussions over who succeeds Jens Stoltenberg, Nato’s secretary-general, when he steps down later this year. Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, who had a productive relationship with Trump during his time in office and has recently praised his stance towards Nato spending targets, is widely considered as likely to get the job.

Dubbed the “Trump whisperer” for keeping the alliance together during his presidency, Stoltenberg adopted a strategy of targeted media messaging to make the case for Nato’s value. He peppered his appearances on American television channels favoured by Trump with words such as “strong”, “fair”, “win” and “leadership”.

His team also commissioned a bar chart showing increased defence spending in green and budget cuts in red. Trump’s years in office were all green: he would regularly cite it in his speeches and press events.

“Fundamentally, it’s about signalling why he has an interest in doing something that we also want,” said a senior European official who was involved in negotiations with Trump during his first term. “On almost all things he’s more transactional than ideological.”

Advertisement

News

Europe and Asia battle for LNG as Iran war chokes supply

Published

on

Europe and Asia battle for LNG as Iran war chokes supply

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Asian and European buyers are battling to source liquefied natural gas after the war in the Middle East choked off shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, blocking a fifth of global supplies.

In an indication of the intensifying contest for LNG since the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran, a handful of gas carriers have abruptly changed course while sailing to Europe and swung towards Asia instead, according to ship monitoring data analysed by the FT.

Countries across Asia are highly dependent on oil and gas sent through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway where shipping has slowed to a near standstill.

Advertisement

Most of the LNG produced in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates is ordinarily shipped through the strait to Asia, and Asian LNG prices surged almost immediately after war broke out, creating an incentive to divert US gas to the region.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

Taiwan, South Korea and Japan are among the countries that need to source LNG to make up for supplies they will not receive from the Gulf, said Massimo Di Odoardo, head of gas and LNG analysis at consultancy Wood Mackenzie.

Taiwan relied on Qatar for more than 30 per cent of its gas consumption in 2025, according to Citigroup, while for South Korea and Japan the figures were 15 per cent and 5 per cent respectively. Asia typically uses more gas than Europe in the hotter summer months because of more air-conditioning use, creating urgency for Asian utilities to secure cargoes.

The vast majority of LNG is sold under long-term contracts rather than on the spot market, but some buyers are able to change the final destination of their purchases and some sellers are willing to break contracts if prices rise high enough.

Advertisement

By Thursday, surging European gas prices and rocketing shipping rates had swung the balance back against diversion of US LNG to Asia, according to data company Spark Commodities.

The decision on where to send gas carriers can depend on the relative levels of the European gas price, Asia’s JKM benchmark for LNG and shipping rates.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

For European buyers, the battle with Asia for LNG supplies is eerily familiar to the situation four years ago after Russia slashed pipeline natural gas flows to the continent following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Competition for spare cargoes then pushed prices to record levels.

On Monday, European gas prices reached as high as €69.50 per megawatt hour, more than double their level before the Iran conflict began. Even so, prices are still far from the €342 per megawatt hour reached in 2022.

JKM gas prices also more than doubled since the start of the war to $24.80 per 1mn British thermal units by Monday, equivalent to €73.10/MWh.

Advertisement

European buyers have learnt from their experience in 2022. “Europe has more weapons at its disposal in this extreme price scenario to try and fight,” said Alex Kerr, a partner at law firm Baker Botts.

Buyers had started putting clauses in contracts to say that suppliers would face much higher penalties if they diverted cargoes for commercial gain, Kerr said.

There is also much more LNG on the market now that is not committed to set destinations, largely because of new projects starting in the US.

While producers such as Qatar impose strict rules on where its LNG can be sent, almost all US exports are allowed to sail wherever buyers want. Several analysts said there had also been an increase in the willingness of some producers to break contracts for financial advantage.

This makes diversions more likely, while the reluctance of some European buyers to sign long-term supply contracts before the outbreak of war this month could prove costly.

Advertisement

Expectations of a global supply glut convinced some European buyers that it would be cheaper to wait until later in the year to sign supply deals.

Wood Mackenzie’s Di Odoardo said the buyers had also held off on LNG purchases because new EU legislation on methane emissions made it unclear whether they could incur penalties in the future.

The risk of prices rising as Europe and Asia fight for available cargoes is increasing every day the Strait of Hormuz stays almost closed.

Gas is more difficult to store and to carry in tankers than oil, making its markets more vulnerable to shortages and price shocks.

“The longer the Strait remains shut, the greater the risk that the shipping disruption turns into a genuine gas shortage, as tankers cannot load and facilities have limited storage,” said consultancy Oxford Economics in a research note.

Advertisement

Additional reporting by Harry Dempsey in Tokyo. Data visualisation by Jana Tauschinski

Continue Reading

News

Is Iran another Iraq? : Sources & Methods

Published

on

Is Iran another Iraq? : Sources & Methods
Poor planning, overly ambitious goals, not thinking through the aftermath. These are the parallels that Richard Haass sees between the 2003 U.S. invastion of Iraq and its current air campaign against Iran.Haass was in charge of planning for the invasion as a top official in the State Department. He was a voice of dissent within the administration. Now he’s president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and author of the Home & Away newsletter. He talks to Host Mary Louise Kelly about the Trump administration’s foreign policy and national security apparatus and where he sees it falling short on Iran.Email the show at sourcesandmethods@npr.orgNPR+ supporters hear every episode without sponsor messages and unlock access to our complete archive. Sign up at plus.npr.org.
Continue Reading

News

Concert promoter Live Nation settles US monopoly case over ticket sales

Published

on

Concert promoter Live Nation settles US monopoly case over ticket sales

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Live Nation has agreed to a preliminary settlement with the US government to end a monopoly case brought by the Department of Justice, in a deal that would stop short of breaking up the company.

The DoJ and some US states have reached a deal with Live Nation, which is the parent company of Ticketmaster, less than a week after trial began in New York, according to a senior justice department official. But 27 other state attorneys-general have refused to join the agreement, arguing it benefits Live Nation. 

The DoJ in 2024 sued Live Nation, accusing it of operating a monopoly that “suffocates its competition” in the live entertainment industry. The government alleged that the company illegally dominated the market for ticketing and concert promotion, using “exclusionary conduct” to wield an outsized influence over the majority of live concert venues across the US.

Advertisement

The lawsuit came amid growing discontent among fans, rivals, artists and US lawmakers, who have accused Live Nation of abusing its market power by charging exorbitant fees and retaliating against venues that choose to work with rivals.

It followed a fiasco during the ticket sale of Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour in 2022, when Ticketmaster’s website was overwhelmed by massive demand.

The terms of the deal, which will have to be confirmed by a federal court, include Live Nation offering a product that will allow other ticketing companies to use its technology. It would also let go of 13 amphitheatres it owns or controls — a number that may rise if other states join the agreement. 

The deal “opens up markets for other competitors, which will allow for competition that previously didn’t exist in primary ticketing and in the live entertainment space”, said a senior DoJ official. 

“That competition is going to have a direct impact on prices coming down,” he added. “It’ll also give consumers more options and not feel like they just have to go through Live Nation or Ticketmaster.”

Advertisement

But New York state attorney-general Letitia James, who has led a bipartisan group of states suing Live Nation, on Monday said in a statement that the agreement “fails to address the monopoly at the center of this case, and would benefit Live Nation at the expense of consumers. We cannot agree to it.”

“[W]e will continue our lawsuit to protect consumers and restore fair competition to the live entertainment industry,” she added.

Live Nation did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Continue Reading

Trending