nato

United States President Donald Trump’s disdain for NATO allies dates back to even before he became president the first time. From anger over their relatively low defence spending to — more recently — threats to take over Greenland, the territory of fellow NATO member Denmark, the American leader has long left the alliance on edge.

But the decision of NATO allies not to join Trump’s war on Iran has deepened the fracture to unseen levels, say analysts. This week, Trump called their lack of support a stain on the alliance “that will never disappear”. Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany put it even more bluntly, hours later: The conflict “has become a trans-Atlantic stress test”.

That back and forth underscores a central question exposed by the Middle East crisis that experts say NATO can no longer put off: can the transatlantic alliance survive, especially if the US pulls out?

“There will be no return to business as usual in NATO, during neither this US administration nor the next one,” said Jim Townsend, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. “We are closer to a break than we have ever been.”

Trump can’t pull the US out of the alliance on a whim.

To formally do so, he needs a two-thirds majority in the US Senate or an act of Congress — scenarios that are unlikely to come to pass any time soon, with NATO still enjoying broad support among many legislators in both major American parties.

But there are other things Trump can do. The US has no obligation to come to the aid of allies should they come under attack. The treaty’s Article 5 states members’ collective‑defence obligation, but it does not automatically force a military response — and there is scepticism among allies over whether Washington would ever come to help.

The US can also move the about 84,000 American troops spread across Europe out of the continent. The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday that Trump was considering moving some US bases from countries deemed unhelpful during the Iran war and transferring them to more supportive countries. He could close down US military bases and cease military coordination with allies.

Since US security guarantees to Europe have undergirded NATO since its founding, such disengagement would do enough damage.

“He doesn’t need to leave NATO to undermine it; by just saying he might, he has already eroded its credibility as an effective alliance,” said Stefano Stefanini, former Italian ambassador to NATO from 2007 to 2010 and former senior adviser to the Italian Presidency.

Still, allies are not helpless. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine revealed the weakened state of European defence industries and their deep reliance on the US. That, coupled with the numerous diplomatic crises in the US-NATO partnership – including Trump’s threat to take control of Greenland – has pushed European allies to invest more in defence capabilities. Between 2020 and 2025, member states’ defence expenditure increased by more than 62 percent.

However, areas where Europe suffers from overdependence on the US include the ability to strike deep into enemy territory, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, space-based capabilities such as satellite intelligence, logistics and integrated air and missile defence, according to a report by the International Institute for Security Studies (IISS).

These challenges remain considerable. It will take the next decade or more to fill them and about $1 trillion to replace key elements of the US conventional military capabilities. Europe’s defence industries are struggling to ramp up production quickly, and many European armies can’t hit their recruitment and retention targets, the IISS report said.

Still, some experts believe a European NATO is possible. Minna Alander, an analyst at the Stockholm Centre for Eastern European Studies of the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, says NATO has, over the years, become a structure for military cooperation between European countries.

“NATO can therefore survive the Iran war — and even a US withdrawal — as European members have an incentive to maintain it, even if in a radically different form,” Alander said.

For some, the deadline is 2029. That is when Russia may have reconstituted its forces sufficiently to attack NATO territory, according to estimates by Germany’s chief of defence, General Carsten Breuer. “But they can start testing us much sooner,” Breuer said in May last year, ordering the German military to be fully equipped with weapons and other material by then. Others estimate that Moscow could pose that threat as early as 2027.

And what about the US — would it do better without NATO?

According to Stefanelli, the former ambassador, the debate about NATO is often “twisted” to portray the alliance’s raison d’être as solely in function of protecting Europe from Russia, as a US favour to the continent.

NATO was a network of alliances born at the onset of the Cold War against the Soviet Union. For decades, the US fought to attract into the alliance as many countries as possible, treating those that refused as friends of the enemy.

Following the September 11, 2001, attacks on the US, NATO invoked for the first and only time Article 5 to rally behind Washington and sent troops to fight in Afghanistan. Thousands of servicemen died there, including nearly 500 from the United Kingdom, and dozens from France, Denmark, Italy and other countries.

And during the war in Iran, European bases were beneficial staging sites for the US military — even if many countries publicly distanced themselves from the conflict.

“NATO served US interests and Trump comfortably overlooks these aspects,” Farinelli, the former ambassador, said. “Europe has its own responsibility by not investing in defence and creating strong dependence, but thinking that NATO serves only European strategic interests is simply not true.”

BRUSSELS — NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has weathered a fresh ordeal with President Trump, this time over the U.S.-Israel war on Iran, a conflict that does not even involve the world’s biggest military alliance and one it was never consulted about.

Since launching the war, Trump has derided U.S. allies as “cowards,” slammed NATO as “a paper tiger” and compared U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer to Neville Chamberlain, who is probably best remembered for a policy of appeasement toward Nazi Germany.

That comes on top of Trump’s repeated threats to seize control of Greenland, which have deeply strained relations with U.S. allies in NATO and raised fears that doing by force could spell the end of the organization.

In recent days, the man who is as good as chairman of the NATO board suggested that the U.S. might leave the trans-Atlantic alliance. Trump already threatened to walk out in 2018 during his first term. His complaint now is that some allies ignored his call to help as Iran effectively shut the Strait of Hormuz, a vital trade waterway.

After talks with Rutte on Wednesday, the alliance’s most powerful leader took to social media to show his annoyance. “NATO WASN’T THERE WHEN WE NEEDED THEM, AND THEY WON’T BE THERE IF WE NEED THEM AGAIN,” Trump posted.

Peppered with questions later on CNN about whether Trump intended to take America out of NATO, Rutte said: “He is clearly disappointed with many NATO allies, and I can see his point.”

Keeping America in

Rutte has earned a reputation as a “Trump whisperer,” notably helping to draw up a plan that has seen European allies and Canada buy U.S. weapons for Ukraine, and keep the administration involved in Europe’s biggest war in decades.

Indeed, one of his most demanding tasks since taking office in 2024 has been to keep the mercurial U.S. leader engaged in NATO, particularly as America has set its sights on security challenges elsewhere, in the Indo-Pacific, Venezuela, and most recently Iran.

Rutte has used flattery, praising Trump for forcing allies to spend more on defense. He has congratulated the U.S. leader over the war and refrained from criticizing Trump’s warning that “a whole civilization will die” should Iran not reopen the strait.

“This was a very frank, very open discussion but also a discussion between two good friends,” Rutte told CNN. He declined to confirm reports that Trump is considering moving U.S. troops out of European countries that do not support the war.

Asked whether the world is safer thanks to the U.S.-Israel war, Rutte said: “Absolutely.”

War launched by a NATO member, not at one

The striking thing about the war on Iran is that NATO has no role to play there. As a defensive alliance it has protected ally Turkey when Iranian missiles were fired in retaliation at its territory, but the war was launched by a NATO member, not at one.

Rutte himself has said that NATO would not join the war, and there is no public confirmation that the U.S. had even raised the issue at the organization’s Brussels headquarters, although it cannot be ruled out that the administration made a request on Wednesday for that to happen.

NATO declined to say whether security for the strait has been officially discussed and referred questions to the United Kingdom, which is leading an effort outside the alliance to make the trade route safe for shipping once the ceasefire is working.

Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna said Thursday that his country is always ready to consider providing support through NATO to partners who request it there.

“If the U.S. or any other NATO ally is asking (for) our support, we are always read to discuss it,” he told broadcaster CNBC. “But for that, we need of course the official ask to discuss then what is the mission, what is the goal?”

If allies “need our support, then we need to plan together,” he said.

NATO trying to stay out

Rutte himself insists that the alliance will only defend itself, and not become involved in another conflict outside of NATO territory, which is considered to be much of Europe and North America.

“This is Iran, this is the Gulf, this is outside NATO territory,” he said.

NATO has operated outside of the Euro-Atlantic area in the past, notably in Libya and Afghanistan. But there is no appetite to do so again given its chaotic U.S.-led exit from Afghanistan in 2021, which former NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg described as a “defeat.”

Trump’s ire seems most directed at Spain and France, rather than NATO itself. Spain has closed its airspace to U.S. planes involved in the Iran war and has refused U.S. forces the use of jointly operated military bases.

After the two-week ceasefire was announced, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez posted on X that his government “will not applaud those who set the world on fire just because they show up with a bucket.”

“What’s needed now: diplomacy, international legality, and PEACE,” he added.

France has been critical, insisting that the war was launched without respecting international law and that Paris was never consulted about it. No blanket restrictions were placed on the use of joint bases or its airspace, but French authorities have said they’re making such decisions on a case by case basis.

Cook writes for the Associated Press.

US president meets NATO chief, expresses disappointment over member states failing to back war on Iran.

United States President Donald Trump has lashed out at NATO over its reluctance to join Washington’s war on Iran, and appeared to revive threats over Greenland, following a meeting with the alliance’s secretary-general.

Writing on his TruthSocial platform on Wednesday, Trump said in capitalised letters that “NATO wasn’t there when we needed them, and they won’t be there if we need them again”.

The remarks came after a two hour meeting with NATO’s Mark Rutte at the White House, a day after the US and Iran agreed to a ceasefire.

Ahead of the meeting, White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said that member states had “turned their backs on the American people”, who fund their nations’ defence. She said Trump would have a “very frank and candid conversation” with the NATO chief and quoted the US president as saying: “They were tested, and they failed.”

The rhetoric has raised seats in the West that Trump could move to withdraw the US from the transatlantic alliance, which he has repeatedly called a “paper tiger”. Several NATO members refused to open their airspace to US military aircraft or send naval forces to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a vital energy route that Iran has effectively closed.

Trump – following his meeting with Rutte – also appeared to revive his threat to seize Greenland from NATO member Denmark – a move had roiled the alliance before he launched his war on Iran

“Remember Greenland, that big, poorly run, piece of ice!!!”, he wrote.

Rutte, known in Europe as the “Trump whisperer” for his skill in maintaining a productive relationship with the US president, told the CNN broadcaster that Trump was “clearly disappointed with many NATO allies”.

Rutte said he had “very frank” and “very open” discussions with Trump during the meeting, and that while he understood the US president’s frustrations, he had pushed back against some of the broader criticism.

“I was also able to point to the fact that the large majority of European nations have been helpful, with basing, with logistics, with overflights, with making sure that they live up to the commitments,” Rutte said.

“What the US did with Iran, they could do because so many European countries lived up to those commitments. Not all of them, and I totally understand his disappointment about that, but it is, therefore, a nuanced picture,” he added.

Rutte also rejected the notion that NATO members considered the war on Iran “illegal”, arguing that there was widespread support in Europe for degrading Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities. He also said that prolonged diplomacy risked a “North Korean moment” – where talks drag on until a country acquires nuclear capacity and it becomes too late to act.

The NATO chief declined to answer directly when asked multiple times if Trump had said he would leave the alliance.

NATO, which includes European countries, the US and Canada, was formed in 1949 to counter the Soviet Union and has been the cornerstone of the West’s security ever since.

The alliance has only activated its mutual defence clause on one occasion, following the September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center in the US.

It was not clear what role Trump had expected it to play in the ⁠Middle East.

The Wall Street Journal, meanwhile, reported that Trump was looking at punishing some NATO members he believed were unhelpful during the conflict by moving US troops out of their countries.

The plan, reported by the Wall Street Journal, would fall short of Trump’s hinted threats to pull the US out of NATO entirely – a move for which he would need the approval of the US Congress.

Rutte did not answer directly when asked about that report.

“The large majority, including France, of European nations, has been doing what they committed before they will do in a case like this,” he said instead.

“So Europe, as a platform of power projection for the United States, was in full play over the last six weeks.”

The US president has lashed out at European partners for declining to contribute military forces to the war on Iran.

United States President Donald Trump has reportedly discussed withdrawing from NATO, the transatlantic alliance that has been a central pillar of Western security for decades.

At a news briefing on Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt framed the US and Israel’s war on Iran as a “test” that the alliance had failed.

Despite Trump’s pressure, NATO allies had declined to contribute military forces to the war, outside of defensive manoeuvres.

Leavitt’s comments came shortly before Trump met with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte at the White House.

“I have a direct quote from the president of the United States on NATO, and I will share it with all of you. They were tested, and they failed,” Leavitt said.

“I would add, it’s quite sad that NATO turned their backs on the American people over the course of the last six weeks, when it’s the American people who have been funding their defence.”

Trump, she continued, was preparing to have “a very frank and candid conversation” with Rutte that afternoon.

In an interview with the news outlet CNN after their meeting, Rutte likewise described the encounter as “frank and open”. He reiterated his support for Trump, but added that NATO allies had offered support through logistics and access to bases.

“Did the president say he was going to try withdraw from NATO or, at the very least, not support NATO as much as other presidents have,” CNN host Jake Tapper asked Rutte.

“There is a disappointment, clearly. But at the same time he was also listening careful to my arguments of what is happening,” Rutte replied, before pivoting to praise of Trump’s leadership.

The US president has had a mixed relationship with NATO, sometimes threatening to pull US support and, at other times, reassuring allies of the US’s continued commitment to the alliance.

Since returning to the presidency in 2025, Trump has renewed his pressure campaign for NATO’s European partners to step up their defence spending.

Last June, at the 2025 NATO summit, he largely succeeded. The NATO members agreed to nonbinding commitments to increase their defence budgets to 5 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035.

But Spain sought an exemption, leading Trump to denounce the country repeatedly over the past year.

Tensions between the US and its European allies were further strained last year when Trump threatened to use military force to seize the self-governing Danish territory of Greenland, claiming that its ownership was essential for national security.

The US has eased away from those threats. But Trump has continued to assert that US ownership of Greenland is necessary, despite strong protests from the territory’s residents and European leaders.

After the US and Israel unilaterally launched a war against Iran on February 28, Trump lashed out at European countries for their lack of interest in contributing to the campaign.

Many legal scholars consider the war an act of aggression, in violation of international law.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday that the Trump administration is considering whether to close US bases or move troops out of countries such as Spain and Germany as punishment for their stance on the war.

When asked by reporters if Trump was considering leaving NATO, Leavitt said it was something the president “has discussed” and could address after his meeting with Rutte.

Trump and Rutte are considered to have a close relationship. Rutte has visited the White House multiple times during Trump’s second term, including in March, July, August and October of last year.

In the past, Rutte has warned that NATO “will not work” without US support.

April 8 (UPI) — NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte was set to kick off a visit to Washington on Wednesday with a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump after European allies’ lack of support for the Iran war prompted fresh threats to pull the United States out of the defensive alliance.

Rutte was expected to use the meeting, at which U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth will also be present, to try to smooth over trans-Atlantic tensions stoked by the refusal of several NATO countries to let U.S. military planes to use their airspace or bases.

Allies also declined to take part in military action to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, effectively blockaded by Iran since the start of the war on Feb. 28, and provide naval vessels to escort oil and gas tankers through the key sea lane.

Trump’s frustration with what he views as a NATO relationship that is unfairly weighted in European allies’ favor boiled over last week after the spat over the strait, with him questioning the point of U.S. membership and saying he would rethink how much the United States contributes to the alliance going forward.

Rubio has also adopted an increasingly hawkish stance calling it a “one-way street” where the United States was always there for other NATO members but was told ‘no’ when it needed to use their military bases, begging the question why it was in the alliance.

The position of European NATO allies is that they were not consulted before the United States launched its airborne offensive in Iran — with the majority of states were not even informed beforehand — and that as a purely defensive alliance, the action has no relevance to NATO.

Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Kurt Volker told Euronews that vocal criticism of military action against Iran expressed by countries including Germany, France, Spain and Finland ran counter to their own interests.

“The messaging from Europe has been terrible,” said Volker, explaining that it created an opening for Trump to deflect blame onto partners who refused assistance, if his Iran gambit backfires.

“The Europeans could have said, ‘we all have a stake in this and let’s see how we can help,'” added Volker who said this could have been achieved without getting pulled into direct military confrontation with Iran.

Patrick Bury, Senior Associate Professor in Warfare at Bath University, said Rutte had a delicate balancing act to perform of persuading Trump of the alliance’s value while as diplomatically as possible defending members’ right to stay out of the war

“His job is to keep the U.S. in NATO. He represents the alliance as a whole, rather than individual member states,” said Bury.

Matthew Kroenig, vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, said if any one could talk Trump down it would be Rutte, calling him a “Trump whisperer.”

President Trump’s meandering speech on the Iran war late Wednesday — in which he paired promises of a swift exit with new threats of escalated bombing and denied responsibility for the Strait of Hormuz — did little to assuage U.S. allies and world markets concerned about the conflict’s ongoing disruptions to the global oil supply.

Stocks dropped after markets opened Thursday and oil prices soared, with the price of U.S. crude oil jumping more than 10%, to above $110.

In the wake of the speech, diplomats from more than 40 nations — not including the U.S. — met to strategize on how to lift Iran’s continued stranglehold on the strait, the vital oil corridor that the U.S.-Israeli war drove Iran to restrict but which Trump on Wednesday said wasn’t his problem.

Iranian officials remained unbowed, asserting the U.S. and Israel “know nothing” of its remaining capabilities, that “not a single life will be spared” if either attempts a ground incursion into its territory, and that “every last” Iranian would become a soldier if necessary.

“Iranians don’t just talk about defending their country. They bleed for it,” Iranian parliament Speaker Mohammad Qalibaf, a pugilistic figure and one of Iran’s most prominent wartime voices, wrote on X. “You come for our home… you’re gonna meet the whole family. Locked, loaded, and standing tall. Bring it on.”

Meanwhile, remarks Trump made earlier Wednesday about leaving NATO elicited subtle rebukes from both international and domestic allies, including French President Emmanuel Macron and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), while the president’s comments about the U.S. not being able to focus on social services like Medicare or other domestic needs such as child care as it wages its foreign war sparked outrage at home.

Far from a call for a unified push to end the war alongside allies, Trump’s speech — his first formal address to the nation since the war began a month ago — further isolated the U.S. and the Trump administration on the global stage.

Trump firmly asserted in his speech that reopening the Strait of Hormuz to oil tanker traffic was not the responsibility of the U.S., despite it causing the war, because it receives less oil from the corridor than other nations.

“The countries of the world that do receive oil through the Hormuz Strait must take care of that passage. They must cherish it. They must grab it and cherish it. They could do it easily. We will be helpful, but they should take the lead in protecting the oil that they so desperately depend on,” Trump said.

“To those countries that can’t get fuel, many of which refuse to get involved in the decapitation of Iran — we had to do it ourselves — I have a suggestion: No. 1, buy oil from the United States of America. We have plenty. We have so much,” Trump continued. “And No. 2, build up some delayed courage.”

He said those nations should have been better assisting the U.S. in its war effort already, but should now “go to the strait and just take it, protect it, use it for yourselves.”

“Iran has been essentially decimated,” he said. “The hard part is done, so it should be easy.”

Trump has consistently downplayed the threat Iran continues to pose in the region. And securing the strait — which runs along Iran’s mountainous coast, full of strategic locations from which Iranian forces can threaten ship traffic — is not an easy task, as was acknowledged by the foreign diplomats meeting to solve the issue without the U.S. on Thursday.

“We have seen Iran hijack an international shipping route to hold the global economy hostage,” said U.K. Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper.

Meanwhile, Macron, speaking in South Korea, said the U.S. “can hardly complain afterward that they are not being supported in an operation they chose to undertake alone.”

Macron also slammed Trump’s criticism of NATO, which Trump called a “paper tiger” in remarks prior to his speech Wednesday.

“If you cast doubt on your commitment every day, you erode its very substance,” Macron said.

Trump for weeks has suggested that NATO allies who declined to join the U.S. war had failed to live up to their treaty obligations, and that remaining in the alliance may not be worth it for the U.S., though he made no mention of NATO in his Wednesday evening speech.

Trump has no power to unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from NATO. That power sits with Congress — where Trump’s own allies downplayed the idea.

“We got an awful lot of people who think that NATO is a very critical, incredibly successful post-World War II alliance,” Thune said. “I think in the world today, you need allies.”

Trump’s formal speech appeared to be geared in part toward his allies at home, including his MAGA base, where frustrations with the war have mounted among the cohort of Trump supporters who’d championed his “America First” message and campaign promises to extricate the U.S. from foreign entanglements, not start new ones.

Trump said he has promised since his first foray into politics in 2015 that he would never let Iran develop a nuclear weapon. He told Americans listening that the war “is a true investment in your children, and your grandchildren’s future,” because it was making the world safer.

However, Trump exacerbated frustrations over the war’s distraction from domestic priorities with separate comments he made earlier on Wednesday at a private Easter luncheon, video of which the White House posted online and then deleted.

In those remarks, Trump said U.S. military needs had to take priority over social services and other major costs for Americans, such as child care, which maybe states could pay for by increasing taxes.

“It’s not possible for us to take care of daycare, Medicaid, Medicare, all these individual things,” Trump said. “They can do it on a state basis. You can’t do it on a federal. We have to take care of one thing: military protection. We have to guard the country.”

The president’s political opponents leaped on the remarks as out of touch.

“Trump says we can pay for war in Iran but can’t afford childcare,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) wrote on X, before asserting that the billions of dollars the U.S. has spent in Iran could have been used to offset Americans’ daycare costs.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, in response, accused Democrats and the media of taking Trump’s remarks “out of context,” and claiming he was only talking about “stopping the scams” and rooting out fraud in such programs.

Democrats also took broader swipes at Trump’s framing of the war.

“Donald Trump’s month-long war with Iran has come at a big cost to taxpayers and has tragically taken the lives of 13 American service members. He dragged our country into a conflict that rattled markets, drove up gas prices, squeezed working families, and further destabilized the Middle East,” Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) wrote on X. “With his poll numbers falling to record lows, Trump is now trying to cut and run with little to show for it. He started this unauthorized war with no clear or consistent justification and the consequences of his choices won’t disappear when he walks away.”

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres on Thursday said the war was “inflicting immense human suffering and already triggering devastating economic consequences,” and called directly on the U.S. and Israel to end it. He also called on Iran to “stop attacking their neighbors” and “respect navigational rights and freedoms along critical maritime routes, including the Strait of Hormuz.”

“Conflicts do not end on their own,” Guterres said. “They end when leaders choose dialogue over destruction.”

In addition to defending NATO, Macron and other French politicians on Thursday were also reacting to Trump mocking Macron in his remarks Wednesday. He mimicked a French accent while accusing Macron of only wanting to aid the U.S. war effort once the battle had been “won” and referenced a moment last year when Brigitte Macron was caught on video pushing her husband’s face, which he said was them joking with each other.

“There is too much talk, and it’s all over the place,” Macron said, according to French newspaper Le Monde. “We all need stability, calm, a return to peace — this isn’t a show!”

Yaël Braun-Pivet, president of France’s lower house of parliament, told the French broadcaster franceinfo that the Iran war is “having consequences for the lives of millions of people, people are dying on the battlefield, and we have a president who is laughing, who is mocking others.”

Times staff writer Nabih Bulos in Beirut contributed to this report.

Iran has asked for a ceasefire, U.S. President Donald Trump says. In a statement on Truth Social today, Trump claimed the request came from “Iran’s New Regime President.” Trump added: “We will consider when Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear. Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!!”

Trump did not mention the top official by name, but described the individual as “much less Radicalized and far more intelligent than his predecessors.”

Iran still has Masoud Pezeshkian as its president, but he was elected back in 2024. In media appearances — most recently yesterday, according to Iranian sources — Pezeshkian said that Tehran had the “necessary will” to bring the war to an end, while stressing that certain conditions and guarantees would be required for that to happen.

The Iranian foreign ministry says President Trump’s claim that the country has asked for a ceasefire is “false and baseless.”

Trump added, “I didn’t need regime change, but we got it because of the casualties of war. We got it. So we have regime change, and the big thing we have is they’re not going to have a nuclear weapon. Nor do they want one.” Iran, for its part, has always claimed that it has no plans to develop nuclear weapons.

Barak Ravid, global affairs reporter with Axios, writes that three U.S. officials confirmed that discussions are taking place about a possible ceasefire, dependent on the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

On Monday, Trump claimed he had already accomplished regime change by killing Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, despite the fact that he had been succeeded by his son, Motjaba. While several other senior Iranian officials have been killed since the war began, critics argue that a leadership shift alone does not amount to true regime change.

“What we are seeing in Iran is not a regime change — but a transformation within the regime itself, one that has made it more extreme,” Danny Citrinowicz, the Israeli military’s former top Iran researcher, posted on X.

Overall, there are ongoing questions about whether the United States has met its evolving objectives since launching a joint attack with Israel on Iran more than four weeks ago.

As for the enriched uranium still possessed by Iran, Trump told Reuters today, “That’s so far underground, I don’t care about that… We’ll always be watching it by satellite.”

Speaking last night, Trump said that Operation Epic Fury could be concluded within two to three weeks. Trump added that reaching a deal with Tehran is not required to bring the conflict to an end.

“We will be leaving very soon,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office last night.

Whatever Trump’s intentions are, we should know more tonight. The White House announced that the U.S. president will deliver “an important update” in a national address this evening at 9:00 p.m. Washington time.

While it remains unclear what new details Trump will share about the claimed ceasefire request, it seems likely that he will voice his opinions about the future of U.S. membership in NATO.

President Trump has said he is seriously weighing the possibility of withdrawing the United States from NATO, once again describing the alliance as a “paper tiger.”

“[NATO] is beyond recognition,” he said in an interview with The Telegraph.

“I was never swayed by NATO. I always knew they were a paper tiger, and Putin knows that too, by the way.”

In recent weeks, the U.S. president has criticized allied nations for their lack of involvement in efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran has effectively closed amid the escalating conflict in the Middle East.

“Beyond not being there, it was actually hard to believe. And I didn’t do a big sale. I just said, ‘Hey’, you know, I didn’t insist too much. I just think it should be automatic,” Trump said.

He also stated that the United States has supported countries in need, including Ukraine, even though it “wasn’t our problem.”

Trump also directed further criticism at the U.K. government, with which his relationship is increasingly strained. He added, “You don’t even have a navy. You’re too old and had aircraft carriers that didn’t work.”

Soon after, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer provided a press conference on the situation in the Middle East, referring to the growing rift with Washington.

“It is increasingly clear that as the world continues down this volatile path, our long-term national interest requires closer partnership with our allies in Europe and with the European Union,” Starmer said.

The Telegraph interview with Trump followed comments from U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggesting Washington may need to reassess its ties with NATO once the conflict with Iran concludes.

“We’re going to have to reexamine the value of NATO and that alliance for our country,” Rubio said in an interview with Fox News last night.

“If NATO is just about us defending Europe if they’re attacked, but them denying us basing rights when we need them, that’s not a very good arrangement. That’s a hard one to stay engaged in.”

UPDATES:

Over coverage has now concluded.

UPDATE: 9:54 PM EST –

During his roughly 19-minute speech from the White House about the war in Iran, Trump offered no real concrete details about its future. He made no mention of sending in ground troops and provided no real sense of when it might end. Meanwhile, contrary to earlier reporting that he might announce a U.S. withdrawal from the NATO alliance, he didn’t even mention the word NATO once.

Here are some highlights.

On the goals of Epic Fury being met:

Our objectives are very simple and clear. We are systematically dismantling the regime’s ability to threaten America or project power outside of their borders. That means eliminating Iran’s Navy, which is now absolutely destroyed, hurting their Air Force and their missile program at levels never seen before, and annihilating their defense industrial base. We’ve done all of it. 

Their Navy is gone, their Air Force is gone, their missiles are just about used up or beaten. Taken together, these actions will cripple Iran’s military, crush their ability to support terrorist proxies and deny them the ability to build a nuclear bomb. Our armed forces have been extraordinary. There’s never been anything like it militarily. Everyone is talking about it, and tonight, I’m pleased to say that these core strategic objectives are nearing completion.

On Iran no longer being a threat:

We are in this military operation so powerful, so brilliant, against one of the most powerful countries for 32 days, and the country has been eviscerated and essentially is really no longer a threat. They were the bully of the Middle East, but they’re the bully no longer.

On The Strait of Hormuz, the flow of oil and allied involvement:

Remember, because of our Drill, Baby, Drill program, America has plenty of gas. We have so much gas. Under my leadership, we are the number one producer of oil and gas on the planet, without even discussing the millions of barrels that we are getting from Venezuela. Because of the Trump administration’s policies, we produce more oil and gas than Saudi Arabia and Russia combined. Think of that, Saudi Arabia and Russia combined, and that number will soon be substantially higher than that. 

There’s no country like us anywhere in the world, and we’re in great shape for the future. The United States imports almost no oil through the Hormuz Strait, and won’t be taking any in the future. We don’t need it. We haven’t needed it, and we don’t need it. We’ve beaten and completely decimated Iran. They are decimated both militarily and economically and every other way. And the countries of the world that do receive oil through the Hormuz Strait must take care of that passage. They must cherish it. They must grab it and cherish it. They can do it easily. We will be helpful, but they should take the lead in protecting the oil that they so desperately depend on. So to those countries that can’t get fuel, many of which refuse to get involved in the decapitation of Iran, we had to do it ourselves. I have a suggestion. Number One, buy oil from the United States of America. We have plenty. We have so much. And Number Two, build up some delayed courage. Should have done it before. Should have done it with us as we ask, ‘go to the Strait and just take it, protect it, use it for yourselves.’ Iran has been essentially decimated. The hard part is done. So it should be easy, and in any event, when this conflict is over, the Strait will open up naturally. It’ll just open up naturally. They’re going to want to be able to sell oil, because that’s all they have to try and rebuild.

On what happens next:

I’ve made clear from the beginning of Operation Epic Fury that we will continue until our objectives are fully achieved. Thanks to the progress we’ve made. I can say tonight that we are on track to complete all of America’s military objectives shortly, very shortly. We’re going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. We’re going to bring them back to the Stone Ages, where they belong.

In the meantime, discussions are ongoing. Regime change was not our goal. We never said regime change, but regime change has occurred because of all of their original leaders’ death. They’re all dead. The new group is less radical and much more reasonable. Yet, if during this period of time, no deal is made, we have our eyes on key targets. If there is no deal, we are going to hit each and every one of their electric generating plants, very hard and probably simultaneously. We have not hit their oil, even though that’s the easiest target of all, because it would not give them even a small chance of survival or rebuilding, but we could hit it and it would be gone, and there’s not a thing they could do about it. 

UPDATE: 6:30 PM EST –

The New York Times is reporting that “multiple U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed in recent days that the Iranian government is not currently willing to engage in substantial negotiations over ending the U.S.-Israeli war.” The newspaper cited anonymous U.S. officials.

“The assessments say the Iranian government believes it is in a strong position in the war and does not have to accede to America’s diplomatic demands,” the Times proffered. “And while Iran is willing to keep channels open, they said, it does not trust the United States and does not think President Trump is serious about negotiations.”

According to The Wall Street Journal, the Low-Cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System (LUCAS) kamikaze drones were designed not by private industry, but by the Pentagon. The drones were used in combat for the first time during Epic Fury. You can read more about these weapons, which CENTCOM commander Adm. Brad Cooper told us are “indespensible” here.

An image emerged online purporting to show damage to the Tabriz Shahid Madani International Airport control tower. The facility, which also serves as a military airbase, was struck in an attack earlier this week.

The explosive aftermath of an Israeli airstrike on an IRGC missile site can be seen in the following video.

WASHINGTON — President Trump signaled Wednesday that the United States is eyeing an offramp in its war with Iran, as he also raised the possibility of a major shift in U.S. alliances, including the potential withdrawal from NATO.

Trump indicated in a social media post that Iran’s president wanted a ceasefire, and that the United States would be open to doing so, if Iran agrees to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil shipping route that has been affected during the monthlong conflict.

“Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!!” Trump wrote.

The remarks appeared to outline a possible diplomatic opening with Tehran, but hours later Iranian officials said that Trump’s claims about being close to a deal were “false and baseless” and that the waterway remained “firmly and decisively under the control” of the Islamic Republic’s forces.

“The strait will not be opened to the enemies of this nation through the ridiculous spectacle by the president of the United States,” the paramilitary Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps wrote in a statement.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Wednesday also wrote a public letter denouncing what he described as a “flood of distortions and manufactured narratives” about the war from the U.S., arguing that Iran is not a threat and had only defended itself against American aggression.

He called on the American people to “look beyond the machinery of disinformation” to reach their own conclusions about the war and its purpose.

“Is ‘America First’ truly among the priorities of the U.S. government today?” he wrote, echoing recent complaints from Trump’s own base about the president’s commitments to his campaign promises.

The dueling messages underscored the uncertainty about how much longer the conflict in the Middle East will last and whether the United States will be able to achieve its main goal of preventing Iran from ever producing a nuclear weapon.

Trump, who on Tuesday said he expects the U.S. will leave Iran within three weeks, was poised to address the nation Wednesday night about the war. The White House said the president’s address would formally outline the objectives of Operation Epic Fury, whose mission has at times been convoluted even as Trump administration officials maintain their explanations for waging the war have been “clear and unchanging.”

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced Trump’s speech late Tuesday, after Trump downplayed remarks made by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth about Iran’s lingering military capabilities.

In the lead-up to those remarks, Trump told Reuters that he was looking to pull American forces from the region “quickly” with the possibility of returning to Iran periodically for “spot hits” when necessary.

The president, who said he believed the U.S. military is close to ensuring Iran loses its ability to possess a nuclear weapon in the future, did not seem too worried about Iran having highly enriched uranium in its stockpiles.

“That’s so far underground, I don’t care about that,” he told Reuters, adding that the U.S. military will be “watching it by satellite.”

Trump, however, remained focused on having Iran reopen the Strait of Hormuz, an oil route through which a fifth of the world’s oil flows.

He said this week that he may pull American forces from the region and leave other countries to deal with the hurdles of reopening the waterway. But on Wednesday, he seemed to walk back that stance, and said a key part of the ongoing negotiations hinged on Iran ending the de facto blockade on the strait.

It remains unclear whether Israel, which began bombing Iran alongside the U.S. on Feb. 28, would agree to the same terms as Trump and stop hostilities against Iran.

Talks about the potential end of the conflict led stocks to rise Tuesday, but it remains unclear whether higher food prices could persist for months or longer. It is also uncertain when U.S. gas prices — which jumped past an average of $4 a gallon this week for the time since 2022 — would go lower.

NATO becomes a factor in the war

As Trump considers pulling out of Iran, he is also weighing a withdrawal from NATO, telling Reuters that fellow member states’ lack of support during the war has him “absolutely” considering withdrawing from the security alliance, which was ratified by the Senate in 1949.

In an interview with Fox News on Tuesday night, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. is planning to “reexamine” its relationship with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and whether it makes sense to be part of a “one-way-street” alliance.

“Why are we in NATO?” Rubio said. “Why do we send trillions of dollars and have all of these Americans stationed in the region, if in our time of need, we are not going to be allowed to use those bases?”

Rubio’s comment marks a notable evolution from his position in Congress. As senator in 2023, Rubio helped spearhead legislation that said the president “shall not suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw the United States” from NATO unless the Senate agrees by a two-thirds vote to do so.

On Wednesday, Rubio told CBS that he maintains Congress should play a role on whether the U.S. should withdraw from NATO. He added that he does not believe Trump “will remove us from NATO,” but he does believe the president will demand that NATO allies “do more.”

In a joint statement Wednesday, Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) said that the United States will remain in the treaty and that the Senate “will continue to support the alliance for the peace and protection it provides America, Europe and the World.”

Although Trump has previously threatened to end U.S. membership in NATO, his most recent remarks have put added pressure on European allies to revisit the terms of their relationship.

In a post on X, Finnish President Alexander Stubb said he had a “constructive discussion” with Trump on Wednesday about NATO.

“Problems are there to be resolved, pragmatically,” Stubb wrote.

Their conversation came after Trump and Hegseth complained that European countries have been hesitant to help the U.S. in its war against Iran. Just this week, Italy and Spain refused to allow U.S. warplanes from landing at their military bases before flying to the Middle East.

Britain’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, defended NATO on Wednesday, saying it was the “single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen” and, more broadly, said he would not cave to pressure to join the Iran war.

“Whatever the pressure on me and others, whatever the noise, I’m going to act in the British national interest in all the decisions that I make,” Starmer told reporters. “That’s why I’ve been absolutely clear that this is not our war, and we’re not going to get dragged into it.”

As diplomatic efforts continue, the Trump administration has increased its military presence in the Middle East, with thousands of U.S. troops arriving in the region as ground operations in the war remain an option.

The U.S. military buildup in the Mideast came as fighting continued to escalate in the Persian Gulf region on Wednesday.

Iran hit an oil tanker off Qatar’s coast, prompting the evacuation of 21 crew members. In Bahrain, there were alerts for incoming missiles, while Kuwait’s state-run news agency KUNA reported that a drone hit a fuel tank at Kuwait International Airport. Meanwhile, Jordan’s military intercepted a ballistic missile and two drones fired by Iran, and an airstrike in Tehran appeared to have hit the former U.S. Embassy compound.

Additionally, Israeli strikes killed at least five people on a Beirut neighborhood. Israel invaded southern Lebanon in March after the Iran-linked militant group Hezbollah began launching missiles into northern Israel.

This article includes reporting from the Associated Press.

LONDON — President Trump has said he is strongly considering pulling the U.S. out of NATO, ratcheting up his criticism of European allies and exposing a wider rift in the transatlantic alliance — this time over America’s war alongside Israel against Iran.

While Trump’s talk of a possible NATO pullout dates back years, the comments to Britain’s Telegraph newspaper, published Wednesday, were among the clearest and most disparaging yet — suggesting the fracture has deepened perhaps to a point of no return.

Asked whether he would reconsider U.S. membership in the alliance after the war on Iran ends, Trump replied: “Oh yes, I would say (it’s) beyond reconsideration.”

Contacted by The Associated Press, NATO did not provide an immediate comment.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, asked about the comment, said Britain was “fully committed to NATO” and called it “the single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen.”

Many European leaders have felt political pressure over the war, which faces opposition in their countries and has sent petroleum prices soaring as Iran has effectively shut the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway between Iran and Oman through which about one-fifth of the world’s oil passes.

“Whatever the pressure on me and others, whatever the noise, I am going to act in the British national interest in all the decisions I make,” Starmer said Wednesday.

Long-simmering tensions within the alliance have bubbled up again over the war. As energy prices have spiked, Trump has been desperate to get countries to send their ships to the Strait. He’s called his NATO allies “cowards,” pulling at any rhetorical lever he can to get help with the fallout of a war that no ally was consulted on or asked to take part in.

For years, Trump has berated America’s European allies, urging them to assume greater responsibility for their own security and spend more on defense. He has argued that the U.S. has done more for them than the other way around.

A U.S. pullout would essentially spell the end of NATO, which flourished for decades under American leadership.

On Truth Social on Tuesday, Trump lashed out at countries “like the United Kingdom, which refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran,” and suggested they buy U.S. oil or go to the Strait of Hormuz themselves “and just take it.”

He also wants allies to help fix damage from the war that they had no part in starting.

The U.K. is working on plans that could help assuage Trump.

On Thursday, Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper will host a virtual meeting of 35 countries that have signed up to help ensure security for shipping in the Strait after the war. Starmer said military planners will also work on a postwar security plan for the strait.

The backdrop: NATO not on board to join U.S. in war

NATO is built on Article 5 of its founding treaty, which pledges that an attack on any one member will be met with a response from them all.

As the Iran war has spread, missiles and drones have been fired toward NATO member Turkey and a British military base on Cyprus, fueling speculation about what might prompt NATO to trigger its collective security guarantee and come to their rescue.

The alliance has not intervened or signaled any plan to. Secretary-General Mark Rutte — who has voiced support for Trump and America’s role in the alliance — has been focusing mostly on Russia’s war against Ukraine, which borders four NATO countries.

NATO operates uniquely by consensus. All 32 countries must agree for it to take decisions, so political priorities play a role. Even invoking Article 5 requires agreement among the allies. Turkey or the U.K. cannot trigger it alone.

In the Mideast war, Trump has bristled at the across-the-board rejection from European and other allies, and even rival China, to help secure the Strait of Hormuz.

Many European Union and NATO member country leaders have fumed since the war’s outset on Feb. 28 because they weren’t informed ahead of time, seen as a break with precedent.

Trump insisted he needed the element of surprise, and he spoke out about possible military action and visibly built up U.S. forces in the region in the run-up to the war.

Rising voices, and tougher action, from Europe over the Mideast war

European leaders have called for the war to stop and want the United States and Iran to return to negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program, which America and Israel see as a threat.

The vocal opposition in Europe to Trump’s war against Iran has started to turn into action.

Spain — the most vocal critic in Europe — on Monday said it closed its airspace to U.S. planes involved in the Iran war.

Early last month, France agreed to let the U.S. Air Force use a base in southern France after receiving a “full guarantee” from the United States that planes not involved in carrying out strikes against Iran would land there.

Other countries have spoken out against it: Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germany’s largely ceremonial president, last week called the aggression against Iran a “dangerous mistake” in violation of international law.

U.S. relations with Europe had already soured in recent months over Trump’s call for Greenland — a semiautonomous territory of stalwart NATO ally Denmark — to become part of the United States, prompting many EU countries to rally behind Copenhagen.

Lawless and Keaten write for the Associated Press. Keaten reported from Geneva. AP writer Lorne Cook in Brussels contributed to this report.

US President Donald Trump has released a series of posts attacking NATO countries including France, Spain and the UK over their role in securing the Strait of Hormuz. Al Jazeera’s Alan Fisher explains what Trump’s latest criticism of US allies means.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said that talks with Iran are under way through intermediaries and that Washington will continue its military campaign until Tehran abandons its nuclear and missile programmes.

He warned on Monday that the Strait of Hormuz will be kept open “one way or another” and that US war objectives could be achieved “in weeks, not months”.

He also said the United States would welcome political change in Iran if the opportunity arose, but said it was not an official objective. Rubio criticised some NATO allies for refusing US access to bases during the war, and said Washington is closely watching developments in Cuba and Venezuela.

Here are the key takeaways from Rubio’s exclusive interview with Al Jazeera’s Hashem Ahelbarra:

Marco Rubio says talks with Iran are happening

Much of the communication between Tehran and Washington is indirect and through intermediaries, but Rubio insisted that it is ongoing.

He said there are “messages and some direct talks going on between some inside of Iran and the United States, primarily through intermediaries”, adding that the US president “always prefers diplomacy, always prefers an outcome”.

His comments come as US President Donald Trump escalated his rhetoric on social media, threatening to “obliterate” Iran’s energy infrastructure if a ceasefire is not reached soon, Al Jazeera’s Kimberly Halkett reported from Washington.

“Taken together, Rubio’s statements and Trump’s posts suggest the US is pursuing a dual-track approach: keeping diplomatic channels open through intermediaries while simultaneously increasing military and economic pressure on Iran,” she said.

US demands Iran abandon nuclear and missile programmes

Rubio said Iran must abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions and stop producing missiles and drones that can threaten countries across the Gulf region, and insisted “The Iranian regime can never have nuclear weapons.”

He said Iran’s missile programme poses a direct threat to countries across the Gulf, and claimed “These short-range missiles that they’re launching, they only have one purpose, and that is to attack Saudi Arabia and the UAE and Qatar and Kuwait and Bahrain.”

Rubio said Iran could pursue civilian nuclear energy, but not in a way that would allow it to quickly develop a nuclear weapon.

“What they cannot have is a system that allows them to quickly weaponise it,” he said. “They have to abandon all these weapon programmes and all their nuclear ambitions.”

However, Hassan Ahmadian, an assistant professor at the University of Tehran, questioned the narrative that Iran poses an offensive threat in the region.

“When was the last time Iran attacked its neighbours over three centuries?” Ahmadian asked, arguing that Iran’s military strategy is shaped by deterrence in an asymmetric conflict.

“Why is it doing this now? Because it’s the underdog in an asymmetric war that it wants to shield itself by expanding.”

Ahmadian added that Iran has been a central focus of US policy for years.

“With the break of two wars in less than a year, we have experienced, Iran has been on the table in different US administrations – all options are on the table,” he said.

Strait of Hormuz will be kept open ‘one way or another’

Rubio said the US would not accept Iran claiming sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz and warned that the waterway would remain open regardless of Iran’s actions.

“Not only is the sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz not acceptable to us, it won’t be acceptable to the world.”

“It sets an incredible precedent … nations can now take over international waterways and claim them as their own.”

“The Strait of Hormuz will be open … It will be open one way or another,” he said, adding that otherwise, Iran would “face real consequences” from the US and other countries.

Iranian analysts suggested the closure of the strait is a temporary wartime measure and could be reversed once the conflict ends.

“It’s opened partially,” Ahmadian said, adding “I think there is no Iranian interest to not open it beyond the war.”

“It’s an asymmetric way of putting pressure on Americans, just as they are bombing Iran, and so after the war there would be no need,” Ahmadian explained. “There will be an arrangement, according to the Iranians, with the GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] countries to reopen it and see how things are managed.”

War objectives will be achieved ‘in weeks, not months’

Rubio said the US military campaign is progressing quickly and outlined the military objectives Washington is trying to achieve.

“Those objectives are the destruction of their air force, which has been achieved, the destruction of their navy, which has largely been achieved.”

“A significant reduction in the number of missile launchers… and we are going to destroy the factories that make those missiles and those drones.”

“We are well on our way or ahead of schedule.”

“We will achieve them in weeks, not months.”

“That’s a matter of weeks. I’m not going to tell you exactly how many weeks, but a matter of weeks, not months.”

Rubio says status of Iran’s new supreme leader is uncertain

Asked by Al Jazeera about his thoughts on Iran’s new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, Rubio said his status remains unclear.

“We don’t even know he’s in power. I know they say he’s in power. No one has seen him. No one has heard from him,” Rubio said.

“It’s very opaque right now. It’s not quite clear how decisions are being made inside of Iran.”

Iran’s leadership change is not an objective of the military operation

The US secretary of state suggested the US would welcome political change in Iran, though he said it was not the official objective of the military operation.

“We would always welcome a scenario in which Iran was led by people that had a different view of the future,” Rubio said. “If that opportunity presents itself, we’re going to take it.”

He said the Iranian people “deserve better leadership” and indicated Washington would not oppose a change in government if it occurred.

“Do we think the people of Iran deserve better leadership than what they’ve gotten from the clerical regime? One hundred percent,” Rubio said. “Would we be heartbroken if there was a change in leadership? Absolutely not.”

He also suggested the US would be willing to play a role if political change became possible.

“If there’s something we could do to facilitate that, would we be interested in participating? Of course.”

However, analysts said Washington’s position on regime change appears to have shifted over time.

“Originally bringing down the government was the goal; there has been a constant drawdown from that,” Paul Musgrave, a professor of government at Georgetown University in Qatar, told Al Jazeera.

“And now we have President Donald Trump on Truth Social saying he is negotiating with elements of what could become a new regime, so there is a lot of confusion here, but it is no longer the number one goal. It’s not something they are laying out,” he noted.

Rubio criticises NATO allies and warns alliance may be reviewed

Rubio said some NATO countries denied the US use of airspace and bases during the conflict and suggested Washington may need to reassess the alliance after the war.

“We have countries like Spain, a NATO member that we are pledged to defend, denying us the use of their airspace and bragging about it, denying us the use of their bases.”

“And so you ask yourself, well, what is in it for the United States?”

“If NATO is just about us defending Europe from attack, but them denying us basing rights when we need them, that’s not a very good arrangement.”

“All of that is going to have to be re-examined.”

VAUX-DE-CERNAY, France — Group of Seven foreign ministers met on Friday in France to discuss the Russia-Ukraine conflict, with deep divisions apparent over the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran, following President Trump’s repeated complaints that America’s allies have ignored or rejected requests for help in the military operation and in confronting Iran’s retaliatory attacks, including the closure of the Strait of Hormuz to most international shipping.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio joined his counterparts from the G7 just 24 hours after Trump’s latest round of insults lobbed at NATO and as instability in oil markets persisted with the Iran war entering its fourth week along with uncertainty over the status of potential negotiations to end the crisis.

Most of America’s closest allies have greeted the Iran war with deep skepticism, sentiments that were on display as the G7 foreign ministers met at a historic 12th-century abbey in Vaux-de-Cernay, outside Paris, even as they urged a diplomatic solution to resolve the situation.

As the diplomats gathered, France’s Minister of the Armed Forces Catherine Vautrin said the war in the Middle East “is not ours,” adding that the French position is strictly defensive.

“The aim is truly this diplomatic approach, which is the only one that can guarantee a return to peace,” she said on Europe 1 and CNews. “Many countries are concerned, and it is absolutely essential that we find a solution.”

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, meanwhile, said Britain also favored a diplomatic path, acknowledging differences with the United States. “We have taken the approach of supporting defensive action, but also we’ve taken a different approach on the offensive action that has taken place as part of this conflict,” she said.

Rubio already faced difficulties in trying to sell the U.S. strategy for the Iran conflict, but Trump’s vitriolic comments about NATO countries not stepping up to help the U.S. and Israel during a Cabinet meeting on Thursday will likely make it an even tougher task.

Of the G7 nations — besides the U.S. — Britain, Canada, France, Germany and Italy are members of the trans-Atlantic military alliance. Japan is the only one that is not.

“We are very disappointed with NATO because NATO has done absolutely nothing,” Trump said in comments echoed later by his top diplomat.

“Frankly, I think countries around the world, even those that are out there complaining about this a little bit, should actually be grateful that the United States has a president that’s willing to confront a threat like this,” Rubio said Thursday.

Rubio, who chatted briefly with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha, also still has work to do to smooth things over with allies like those in Europe that have faced criticism or outright threats from Trump and others in his Republican administration. The Europeans are still smarting over Trump’s earlier demands to take over Greenland from NATO ally Denmark and are concerned about U.S. support for Ukraine in its war with Russia. The conflict in the Middle East has added another point of tension.

“Today at the G7 I reiterated that President Trump is committed to reaching a ceasefire and negotiated settlement to the Russia-Ukraine war as soon as possible,” Rubio said in a post on X containing a photo of him meeting with his counterparts.

Shortly before leaving Washington Rubio told reporters he was not concerned about G7 unhappiness with the Iran war.

“I’m not there to make them happy,” he said. “I get along with all of them on a personal level, and we work with those governments very carefully, but the people I’m interested in making happy are the people of the United States. That’s who I work for. I don’t work for France or Germany or Japan.”

Trump has complained about lack of support from allies

Trump has complained that he has not been able to rally support behind his war of choice in Iran and that NATO and most other allies have rejected his calls to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran’s chokehold has disrupted oil shipments and pushed up energy prices.

“We’re there to protect NATO, to protect them from Russia. But they’re not there to protect us,” Trump said Thursday.

Before the U.S. leader’s comments, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte reiterated the increase in defense spending by alliance members — which Trump has urged — saying Europe and Canada had been “overreliant on U.S. military might” but a “shift in mindset” has taken hold.

Iran has long insisted that its nuclear program is peaceful, and its ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency has said that the United States and Israel’s “justification that Iran wants to develop nuclear weapons is simply a big lie.” The ambassador, Reza Najafi, has accused the U.S. and Israel of attacking ”Iran’s peaceful safeguarded nuclear facilities.”

G7 host France has been skeptical of the Iran war

France is hosting the G7 meeting near Versailles and has been highly skeptical of the war. Besides Vautrin’s comments on Friday, the chief of the French defense staff, Gen. Fabien Mandon, complained this week that U.S. allies had not been informed about the start of hostilities.

“They have just decided to intervene in the Near and Middle East without notifying us,” Mandon said, lamenting that the U.S. “is less and less predictable and doesn’t even bother to inform us when it decides to engage in military operations.”

However, 35 countries joined military talks hosted by Mandon on how to reopen the Strait of Hormuz “once the intensity of hostilities has sufficiently decreased,” France’s Defense Ministry said.

Rubio said that with Iran threatening global shipping, countries that care about international law “should step up and deal with it.”

Similar sentiments to Mandon’s have been expressed by other allies that also worry about the U.S. commitment to Ukraine as the Iran war closes in on four weeks.

“We must avoid further destabilization, secure our economic freedom and develop perspectives for an end of and the time after the hostilities,” German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said Thursday. “Our joint support for Ukraine … must not crumble now. That would be a strategic mistake with a view to Euro-Atlantic security.”

Lee writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Lorne Cook in Brussels, John Leicester in Paris and Geir Moulson in Berlin contributed to this report.

March 27 (UPI) — All 32 NATO nations met or exceeded the alliance’s target for defense spending last year, Secretary-General Mark Rutte said, as Canada and several ally nations increased their investment in defense amid war in Europe and the Middle East.

“We see clearly that our world is constantly changing. And we are adapting to ensure we remain prepared,” he said during a press conference in Brussels, as he released the alliance’s 2025 Annual Report.

“The threat picture across 2025 made clear that we need to do more. And throughout the year, NATO continued to come together to ensure that we are ready and able to respond to any threat, across all domains, both now and in the future.”

The defensive military alliance has called on member states to invest at least 2% of their gross domestic product in defense since at least 2006, with allies in 2014 pledging that those below the guideline would move toward it within a decade — though few nations did so for years.

Amid what he described as a more dangerous security environment — including Russia’s war against Ukraine, the Kremlin’s support from China, Iran, North Korea and Belarus, as well as the broader instability centered on Iran — countries are stepping up, he said, calling 2025 “a landmark year for NATO.”

Amid the protracted war in Europe and uncertainty about the United States’ cooperation with the alliance, defense ministers last year made a commitment to investing 5% of GDP annually in core defense requirements by 2035.

Among nations Rutte highlighted for reaching the 2% benchmark was Canada, which, under the Liberal government of Prime Minister Mark Carney, has sharply increased its defense spending as its once iron-clad relationship with the United States has frayed under the weight of U.S. President Donald Trump‘s incendiary rhetoric, threats of annexation and tariffs.

In the last 10 months of the Carney government, Canada has spent more than $23.8 billion on defense and security, pushing it over the 2% threshold for the first time since the end of the Cold War — and well ahead of the 2032 pledge made by former Defense Minister Bill Blair in 2024.

“As a result of our efforts, this morning, NATO confirmed that Canada has achieved its 2% defense expenditure target — half a decade ahead of the original schedule,” Carney said during a press conference held Thursday aboard a Royal Canadian navy vessel in Halifax Harbor.

“Canadians are responding to our renewed commitment and call to serve.”

The Liberal leader described the 2% target as “the foundation” for further investment in the country’s defense expenditure, as he announced a further $2.1 billion defense package for Atlantic Canada.

“Over the past 11 months, one of our government’s key priorities has been to reinvest in rebuilding and rearming the [Canadian Armed Forces] to provide you with the support you need to achieve mission success,” he said.

“We will continue our efforts with the same speed and determination that we have shown from the very beginning.”