Trump's NATO Gripes Justified, Experts Say

Critics were wrong about Trump's speech, but his skepticism of some NATO allies is real, analysts argue.

Apr. 3, 2026 at 10:35pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A serene, photorealistic painting of a solitary NATO flag pole standing in an empty urban plaza, the flag hanging limply in the warm, golden light of the setting sun, conveying a sense of quiet contemplation and uncertainty about the future of the alliance.The Trump administration's growing skepticism of NATO reflects longstanding tensions within the transatlantic alliance.NYC Today

Conservative commentators argue that President Trump's criticism of NATO allies, especially in 'old Europe,' is justified, despite predictions that he would lash out at the alliance. They say his grievances go beyond 'European pique' and warn that the 'work of generations' could be 'undone' by 'mutual vexation.' Meanwhile, a historian argues the U.S. is engaged in a war to 'defang' Iran's military capabilities, while a libertarian says the country is doing fine without a 'nation's doctor' in the surgeon general role.

Why it matters

Trump's stance on NATO reflects growing skepticism within his administration about the commitment of some European allies, which could have significant implications for the future of the transatlantic alliance. The debate over the U.S. strategy toward Iran also highlights the political divisions around the use of military force and the goals of such interventions.

The details

Conservative commentator Noah Rothman of National Review argues that while critics predicted Trump would announce plans to withdraw from NATO, 'the outrage in this administration toward America's European allies is real.' He says Trump's grievances go beyond 'European pique' and are focused on specific allies, especially in 'old Europe,' who have denied overflight rights. Historian Victor Davis Hanson of The Free Press, meanwhile, says the U.S. intends to 'finish destroying the arsenal and factories of Iran's ballistic missile program' and 'mostly end Iranian subsidies to its Arab terrorist proxies.' He argues this is as much a political as a military challenge, with Democrats offering 'no positive counter-agenda' and instead pushing 'the perception of American defeat.' Libertarian Jeffrey A. Singer of Reason magazine argues that the country is 'doing fine' without a surgeon general, as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institutes of Health now dominate federal public health activity.

  • President Trump delivered the speech on Wednesday night.

The players

Noah Rothman

A commentator at National Review.

Victor Davis Hanson

A historian writing for The Free Press.

Jeffrey A. Singer

A libertarian writer for Reason magazine.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“'Trump's grievance is not with NATO per se but some of its constituent members,' especially the ones in 'old Europe' who have denied overflight rights.”

— Noah Rothman, Commentator

“The president's endgame challenges 'are as much political as military.' Since Democrats offer 'no positive counter-agenda,' they push 'the perception of American defeat, in the hope they 'win a new Democratic Congress.'”

— Victor Davis Hanson, Historian

“'Americans have gone over 430 days without a 'nation's doctor,' as the surgeon general is often called — and few, if any, have noticed.'”

— Jeffrey A. Singer, Libertarian writer

The takeaway

The debate over Trump's stance on NATO and the U.S. strategy toward Iran highlights the ongoing political divisions and differing views on America's role in the world and the use of military force. While some see Trump's NATO criticism as justified, others warn of the potential consequences of eroding transatlantic cooperation.