U.S. President Donald Trump’s latest remark about expelling Spain from NATO has sent shockwaves through Europe. His blunt statement — “Maybe you should throw them out of NATO” — came during a meeting with Finnish President Alexander Stubb in Washington, and it instantly reignited debate about the alliance’s internal unity, purpose, and growing dependence on American leadership.
At first glance, Trump’s frustration seems rooted in economics. He was referring to Spain’s refusal to meet the new NATO defense spending target of five percent of GDP, a figure far beyond what most member states currently contribute. Yet beneath that financial argument lies a deeper political reality: NATO’s unequal power structure, Washington’s dominance, and Europe’s struggle to reconcile loyalty to the U.S. with its own strategic and moral choices.
Spain: The New “Laggard” in Trump’s NATO Doctrine
Spain’s defense budget has long been among the lowest in NATO, currently hovering around 1.3% of GDP. While other European countries have ramped up military spending in response to the Ukraine war, Spain has remained cautious — citing economic constraints, domestic priorities, and a belief in diplomacy over militarization.
But Trump’s attack on Spain wasn’t merely about numbers. In recent months, Madrid has taken strong stances against Israel’s military operations in Gaza, calling for an arms embargo and pushing for Palestinian recognition across Europe. Spain’s progressive coalition government, led by Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, has also criticized Western double standards in global conflicts.
That position directly contradicts Washington’s unwavering support for Israel. Many analysts believe Trump’s comment was not only about defense budgets but also a warning to European governments that diverging from U.S. geopolitical lines comes at a price.
A Political Powerplay Disguised as a Budget Issue
During his presidency, Trump repeatedly accused NATO members of “freeloading” on American protection. He often threatened to reduce U.S. commitment to the alliance unless other members paid more. Now, his proposal of a five percent target — more than double NATO’s current benchmark — feels less like a policy goal and more like a loyalty test.
By singling out Spain, Trump underscores the transactional nature of his foreign policy: alliances are not about shared values or mutual defense, but about financial obedience. This approach transforms NATO from a collective security pact into a pay-to-play organization where Washington dictates the terms.
For Spain, meeting such an inflated target would be nearly impossible. Its defense industrial base is relatively small compared to nations like Germany, France, or the U.S. Moreover, public opinion in Spain leans heavily toward social spending, climate policy, and diplomacy rather than large military investments.
Madrid’s refusal, therefore, is not defiance — it’s pragmatism. But to Trump, it’s a sign of weakness and disloyalty.
The Israeli Factor: A Hidden Tension
Behind Trump’s attack lies a subtler but significant layer — Spain’s criticism of Israel’s war in Gaza. Sánchez has been among the few Western leaders to openly challenge Tel Aviv’s policies, even hinting at possible sanctions.
This has made Spain a political outlier in Europe, where most governments have aligned closely with Washington and Israel. Trump, a staunch ally of Israel during his presidency, may view Spain’s independent position as a threat to the pro-U.S. consensus that holds NATO together.
In this context, Trump’s remark can be seen as both economic blackmail and ideological enforcement — a reminder that NATO membership now carries expectations that go beyond defense spending. It demands political conformity, particularly on issues central to U.S. and Israeli interests.
NATO’s Unequal Structure Exposed
Trump’s statement also peeled back the long-standing illusion of NATO as an alliance of equals. The reality is that the United States contributes nearly 70% of NATO’s total defense expenditure. It hosts the alliance’s supreme commander, provides logistical and intelligence dominance, and holds unmatched political leverage.
The new NATO Secretary-General, former Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, recently made headlines after calling Trump “Daddy” — half-jokingly but symbolically accurate. The comment reflected the uncomfortable truth: despite all its rhetoric about unity, NATO remains heavily dependent on Washington’s approval.
Trump’s rhetoric merely vocalizes what many already know — that the U.S. treats NATO as a tool of influence, not partnership. His threat to “throw out” a sovereign member state is not just diplomatically reckless but also reveals how fragile the alliance’s internal democracy truly is.
An Alliance Under Strain
The broader context makes Trump’s remarks even more consequential. Europe is grappling with economic stagnation, energy insecurity, and political fatigue from the prolonged Ukraine conflict. Citizens across the continent are questioning the endless flow of funds and weapons eastward while domestic inflation and energy costs rise.
Many NATO members — including Italy, Slovakia, and Hungary — have expressed doubts about escalating defense budgets when social sectors are under strain. In this climate, Trump’s call for five percent defense spending feels detached from economic reality.
The irony, however, is that NATO’s effectiveness has already come under question. Despite record military spending, the alliance has failed to deliver a decisive strategic outcome in Ukraine. Russia has adapted, strengthened its defense production, and maintained battlefield resilience. Within this failure, Europe’s frustration is growing — and Trump’s divisive rhetoric only accelerates the erosion of trust.
The Strategic Importance of Spain
Strategically, expelling Spain would be nonsensical. The country hosts two crucial American military bases: Rota and Morón. These installations are vital for operations across the Mediterranean, North Africa, and the Middle East. Without Spain, NATO’s logistical chain in the southern theater would collapse.
Thus, Trump’s comment, while politically theatrical, has no practical foundation. It’s more of a message — an intimidation tactic designed to reinforce U.S. dominance and remind Europe that its security infrastructure still depends on Washington’s goodwill.
But such posturing comes with risks. The more the U.S. uses coercion rather than collaboration, the more likely Europe is to drift toward independent defense planning — or even alternative alliances.
A Symbol of a Fracturing West
Trump’s outburst may, in hindsight, be remembered as more than a headline — it could mark the symbolic beginning of NATO’s internal unraveling. When a leading power starts threatening its allies, unity is already in decay.
NATO’s biggest strength was never just its military might; it was the perception of solidarity. But that perception now stands in question. Spain’s defiance, Trump’s dominance, and Europe’s economic fatigue together form a cocktail of tension that could reshape the future of Western geopolitics.
As the world tilts toward multipolarity — with BRICS expanding and regional powers asserting independence — NATO’s internal contradictions are becoming impossible to ignore. The alliance once built on “collective defense” now appears trapped in “collective dependence.”
The Alliance at a Crossroads
Donald Trump’s threat to expel Spain from NATO is more than a diplomatic provocation — it’s a mirror reflecting the alliance’s crisis of identity. It exposes a West struggling to maintain unity, leadership, and moral credibility in an era where coercion replaces cooperation.
Spain’s refusal to yield may not weaken NATO — it may save its soul, by forcing a long-overdue debate about what the alliance truly stands for. Because an alliance built on fear and dominance cannot last.
And if NATO continues down this path, Trump may not need to destroy it — it might simply collapse under the weight of its own contradictions.
