{"id":32653,"date":"2025-06-26T13:30:49","date_gmt":"2025-06-26T13:30:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/financialrush.com\/?p=32653"},"modified":"2025-06-26T13:30:49","modified_gmt":"2025-06-26T13:30:49","slug":"nato-victorious-in-its-battle-to-win-over-donald-trump","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/financialrush.com\/?p=32653","title":{"rendered":"Nato victorious in its battle to win over Donald Trump"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

This is an on-site version of the White House Watch newsletter. You can read the previous edition\u00a0here<\/a>. Sign up for free here<\/a> to\u00a0get it on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Email us at\u00a0whitehousewatch@ft.com<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Good morning and welcome to White House Watch! Let\u2019s jump right into:<\/p>\n

Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte can breathe a sigh of relief after the summit designed to win over Donald Trump did just that.<\/p>\n

The 32 allies pledged to spend 5 per cent of their GDP on defence<\/a> in a bid to keep the Nato-sceptic US president on side and willing to protect Europe should it be attacked.<\/p>\n

But it was a rollercoaster to get there.<\/p>\n

On his way to The Hague, Trump struck a nerve by questioning the \u201cdefinition\u201d of Article 5<\/a>, Nato\u2019s mutual defence pact, sparking speculation among summit attendees about how badly things could go when all the leaders met.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The US president also caused a stir when he posted text messages<\/a> from Rutte on social media. Everybody was talking about them at dinners and cocktail parties on Tuesday night, debating whether the secretary-general should have sent them, and if he knew Trump would post them. <\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Spain broke ranks to get an exemption on the 5 per cent target, threatening to fracture the unity Rutte wanted on display. Trump noticed.<\/p>\n

But the mood of the summit improved after Trump spent an evening with the king and queen of the Netherlands and was warmly received by his European counterparts. Some allies didn\u2019t love Rutte\u2019s fawning performance for Trump \u2014 whom he even referred to as \u201cDaddy\u201d at one point \u2014 but it ultimately kept the US president happy, two officials told the Financial Times.<\/p>\n

Yesterday, Trump vowed to \u201cstand with\u201d the rest of the alliance and said the summit\u2019s achievements were \u201ctremendous\u201d. Nato is \u201cnot a rip off, and we\u2019re here to help them,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Still, he took a swipe at Spain<\/a>, threatening to \u201cmake them pay twice as much\u201d in tariffs as part of a US-EU trade deal, but it didn\u2019t sour him as much as some had expected. Trump even had kind words for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and harsher ones for Russia: \u201cVladimir Putin really has to end that war,\u201d he said.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Though Nato avoided the worst-case Trump scenario, not everybody thought the alliance projected strength.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Its communiqu\u00e9 didn\u2019t \u201chave the courage to take on political controversy and argument out of fear of being seen as weak\u201d, Jim Townsend, former US deputy assistant secretary of defence for European and Nato Policy, told me.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt doesn\u2019t demonstrate the strength of its convictions. It comes across as cowardly.\u201d<\/p>\n

The latest headlines<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/picture><\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

What we\u2019re hearing<\/h2>\n

As soon as the war between Israel and Iran kicked off, oil traders began obsessively tracking the developments because of the potential risk to oil and gas flows in the region.<\/p>\n

And once Iran launched its retaliatory missiles against the US\u2019s biggest base in the Middle East after Trump got involved in striking the Islamic republic, oil traders responded super quickly \u2014 but by selling, not buying<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The price of Brent crude, the international benchmark, began to slide just seven minutes after Tehran\u2019s first missiles, and within two hours, it experienced its sharpest daily drop in almost three years.<\/p>\n

\"Line<\/picture><\/figure>\n

Oil markets usually surge at any sign of geopolitical strife, so the rapid sell-off caught many off guard. Turns out, those traders correctly concluded that the retaliation would cool tensions between the US, Israel and Iran, not inflame them.<\/p>\n

They were fixated on the risk that Iran would block the Strait of Hormuz, through which one-third of the world\u2019s seaborne crude passes each day.<\/p>\n

\u201cEveryone was focused on the Strait [of Hormuz] being shot at. As soon as it became clear that this was not going to happen, the risk premium came off,\u201d Amrita Sen, founder of market intelligence company Energy Aspects, told the FT\u2019s Malcom Moore, George Steer and Jamie Smyth.<\/p>\n

Traders were also keeping an eye on satellite images of the US air base at Al Udeid in Qatar ahead of time: \u201cIt is all orchestrated, we know the base is empty. I knew from June 18 that the base was empty,\u201d said Jorge Montepeque, an oil analyst at Onyx Capital Group, just after Iran\u2019s attack began on Monday. <\/p>\n

\u201cWe have watched this movie before.\u201d<\/p>\n

Viewpoints<\/h2>\n