Donald Trump’s rapport with NATO allies in Washington has rarely been characterized as harmonious. However, his recent conduct at the NATO summit in Ankara this week was particularly erratic, even by his own unpredictable standards, leaving analysts struggling to find adequate explanations for his behavior.
Upon arriving in Turkey last Tuesday, Trump appeared visibly frustrated, particularly about the breakdown of a temporary ceasefire agreement he had brokered with Iran. His anger manifested in threats of increased violence and turmoil as a response to the situation.
In a stark reversal from his previous comments, Trump labeled Iran’s Islamic leadership — which he had recently commended as “very reasonable” — as “scum” and “sick people” during remarks made alongside NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. He also expressed dissatisfaction with NATO itself, the foundational alliance for Western security since its establishment in 1949 to counter Soviet communism. Trump voiced grievances regarding the alliance’s members, including Britain, for not supporting him in the conflict with Iran. He reiterated his earlier claims about Greenland, despite its status as Danish territory, and suggested that the U.S. discontinue trade relations with Spain due to its socialist government, which he criticized as “bad people” for not adhering to defense spending commitments.
Remarkably, just hours after his tirade against fellow leaders, Trump emerged from a meeting with them to express sentiments of unity, claiming, “There was a lot of love in that room.” He even described the meeting as one of the most positive he had ever experienced within NATO.
Trump’s newfound camaraderie extended to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whom he previously viewed with skepticism. He commended Zelenskyy for his resourcefulness in maintaining Ukrainian resilience amid the ongoing conflict with Russia, led by Vladimir Putin, whose leadership style Trump has often been perceived to admire.
Media outlets readily described Trump’s unpredictable demeanor with terms like “mercurial” and “whiplash,” but the underlying reasons for this behavior and its potential long-term implications remain less clear. Analysts suggest that Trump’s sudden shift in attitude towards NATO — which he has previously dismissed as a “paper tiger” and accused of financially exploiting the U.S. — could stem from a variety of factors, ranging from his impulsive nature to a newfound affinity for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the summit’s host. Trump has often praised Erdoğan, who has been in power for 23 years, despite his controversial political background.
During a joint press conference with Erdoğan, Trump remarked that he might not have participated in the summit had it not been in Turkey, citing a “great relationship” with the country. He characterized Turkey as “much more loyal” than other nations he expected to be reliable. Trump noted, “Sometimes you get along with the toughest people, like Erdoğan. And sometimes you don’t get along with the weakest most pathetic people, maybe you don’t respect them.”
Ian Lesser, a fellow at the German Marshall Fund who attended the summit, described it as having a “bipolar quality,” attributing this to Trump’s relationship with Erdoğan. He pointed out that Erdoğan’s contentious reputation as an autocrat who suppresses dissent may have played a role in ensuring that Trump’s theatrics did not overshadow the summit’s proceedings.
Lesser added that Trump appeared intent on allowing Erdoğan to portray the summit as a success. He emphasized that individual personalities significantly influence international relations and that Trump’s approach often prioritizes personal connections over traditional alliances.
In addition, the enthusiastic praise from Rutte, a former Dutch prime minister known for his ability to engage with Trump, may have contributed to a more favorable atmosphere. Rutte has consistently acknowledged Trump’s efforts to enhance NATO funding among European allies, a longstanding concern for the U.S. president.
Trump’s surprising shift in tone towards Zelenskyy, who he had previously told during a White House meeting that “You don’t hold the cards,” may also stem from disillusionment with Putin, who has made no concessions in the prolonged conflict. Furthermore, there appears to be an increasing awareness of congressional sentiment regarding Ukraine, which Trump has often overlooked in other matters.
As the situation continues to develop, the implications of Trump’s unpredictable behavior at the summit remain to be seen, with analysts keeping a close eye on both international relations and domestic political dynamics.
