Trump pleased? What happened at NATO summit and what Ukraine gained

Key questions:

• What did the leaders of NATO member states bring to The Hague?

• What is in the summit's final statement, and what does it mean for Ukraine?

• Zelenskyy and Trump's conversation: Will there be more pressure on Russia?

NATO summits are usually prepared months in advance, with proposed changes in alliance policy being thoroughly worked out and coordinated with all member states. However, this time, the organizers had to revise everything practically at the last minute.

Just a month ago, there were hopes that US President Donald Trump would be able to pressure Putin into ending the war. Europe was expecting this and was prepared to send a contingent to Ukraine. Although it would not have been based on NATO structures, the alliance would have been involved indirectly. However, the negotiation process stalled, and so did the European initiative.

Trump has shown little interest in European affairs. What's more, he does not want to talk to Europeans about ending the Russia–Ukraine war, knowing they will try to persuade him again. This was clearly evident during the recent G7 summit in Canada. Trump left the summit early, which led to the cancellation of his planned meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

At the NATO summit, organizers took lessons from the Canada summit into account. The event was shortened specifically for the US President, as was the final joint statement. In addition, Trump was treated as the summit's key guest - something that was easy to notice.

"Trump has a unique approach, a unique vision, and I think everyone is used to it. But it was important to keep this dialogue on the same page. So to speak, the Europeans made sure the weather was good for Trump. His psycho-emotional state and perception of what was happening were positive," said Serhii Dzherdzh, PhD in Political Science and head of the public League Ukraine–NATO, in a comment to RBC-Ukraine.

A brief statement with a positive tone

Instead of a lengthy position on a wide range of international issues, the final declaration of the summit contains only five paragraphs. The main point: by 2035, NATO countries pledge to allocate 5% of their GDP annually for defense and security. Of that, 3.5% will go toward funding armed forces, and 1.5% toward infrastructure projects related to security, such as building transportation routes and funding the defense industry.

This is one of the changes Trump had long been demanding from European NATO members. However, reaching this target over ten years represents a significant compromise. Member states will be allowed to include their military aid to Ukraine in the calculation of their overall defense spending.

"Here we see a unified position between Europe and the United States. If NATO countries gradually begin increasing their spending on their own armed forces, Europe will strengthen its position. And along with that process, support for Ukraine will also grow - there will be weapons production, ammunition production, and, accordingly, the military resources that will help the Ukrainian Armed Forces," Dzherdzh emphasized.

In addition, a clear positive moment is the inclusion of aid to Ukraine in overall defense expenditures - otherwise, member states would have to look for additional funds for defense and help Kyiv separately.

Mixed messages of the summit

The political signals for Ukraine are also generally positive, but with some nuances. In the final declaration, Russia is recognized as a long-term threat to the entire Euro-Atlantic space, including the United States. However, this continues the line set out in NATO's Strategic Concepts, adopted in 2022, reminded Serhii Dzherdzh.

There is no mention of Ukraine's membership prospects in the final document - a compromise with Trump and several other skeptics. Still, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte stated that Ukraine's path to membership remains irreversible, and member states will continue supporting Kyiv in this way.

"We stand with Ukraine in its pursuit of peace and will support it on its irreversible path to NATO membership," Rutte said.

Clearly, last year's summit declaration remains in force: Ukraine's future is in NATO, and its path to membership is irreversible.

It is also fundamentally important that NATO leaders reaffirmed their unwavering commitment to collective defense as enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty. This article states that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. This point is important given Trump's regular suggestions that the US may not defend those NATO members who spend too little on defense.

Zelenskyy–Trump: A new meeting

An additional bonus for Kyiv was the meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump on the sidelines of the NATO summit. It took place when the negotiation process to end the Russian-Ukrainian war was almost stopped, and the US President refused to put pressure on Russia. Moreover, there are several unresolved bilateral US–Ukraine issues - from the potential purchase of American weapons (with European funding) to implementing a minerals agreement.

Comments from both sides were mostly positive. "We talked about how to protect our people. We appreciate the attention and willingness to help bring peace closer," Zelenskyy wrote after the meeting.

From the US President, there was little specificity. When asked by a journalist whether he had discussed ending the war in Ukraine with Zelenskyy, Trump replied:
"I just wanted to know how he was doing. He's very nice, actually. We had a little rough time, it could have been nicer. I think he'd like to see an end to it (war - ed.). I do. I think it's a great time to end it (war - ed.)," Trump said, adding that he would again try to speak with Putin.

Experience has proven that such conversations don't necessarily lead to progress in negotiations. Just before the summit, Trump claimed to have ended the war between Israel and Iran. Although the conflict in the Middle East is far from over, those events show that the US President, when motivated, can act decisively, even against his intelligence services and the interests of his allies. In this context, Europe and Ukraine must find various ways to channel Trump's energy in the right direction, though that isn't always successful. However, in that respect, the NATO summit can be seen as relatively successful.

Sources: statements from NATO leaders, Secretary General Mark Rutte, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the text of the summit's final declaration, and commentary from Serhii Dzherdzh.