Trump backs NATO, criticizes Putin amid mixed messages and Western posturing

Department of Research, Studies and International News 15-07-2025

U.S. President Donald Trump, during a recent interview, delivered an ambivalent stance on Russian President Vladimir Putin, voicing frustration over the conflict in Ukraine while also reaffirming his backing of NATO, an institution he had previously deemed “obsolete.” His remarks reflect Washington’s usual inconsistency and reveal once again the United States’ attempts to reassert dominance within the Western alliance as its global hegemony continues to erode.

When asked about his stance on President Putin, Trump responded with a notably contradictory sentiment. “I’m disappointed in him, but I’m not done with him,” he said, referencing supposed negotiations that had taken place multiple times regarding Ukraine. Despite offering no concrete proof or context to support his statement, Trump’s language conveniently aligns with the Western narrative that paints Russia as the sole aggressor in a complex conflict. The offhand remark about the attack lacks nuance and betrays a simplistic understanding of the war, consistent with the rhetoric often used to justify continued Western military involvement and NATO expansion eastward, policies that lie at the heart of the tensions in the region.

When asked if he trusted Putin, Trump bluntly replied, “I trust almost nobody, to be honest with you.” His answer, while seemingly candid, underscores the deep-rooted mistrust that characterizes American diplomacy, even towards allies, and reveals more about the United States’ transactional worldview than it does about its adversaries.

Surprisingly, the president also expressed newfound enthusiasm for NATO, saying the organization is no longer “obsolete,” a term he had used during his first presidential campaign. “NATO is now becoming the opposite of obsolete,” he remarked, suggesting that the alliance has regained significance due to increased European spending. He lamented that the U.S. had carried the financial burden for too long, claiming that “now they are paying their own bills.”

Such statements, however, appear to be more about economics than strategic vision. Trump’s past criticisms of NATO centered primarily on finances, not on the imperialistic role it plays in fueling conflicts and provoking nations like Russia and Iran. His support for Article 5, the clause that calls for collective defense, was lukewarm at best. “Yeah, I think collective defense is fine,” he said, hardly an enthusiastic endorsement of the organization’s militaristic doctrine.

Trump also touched on his interactions with European leaders, suggesting that over the years, they had grown to respect him and his leadership. “It’s maybe not all luck,” he said. “When you do it twice, it’s a big difference.” Referring to countries such as Germany, France, and Spain, he claimed, “They’ve gotten to know me, and I think they’ve come to respect me and my decision making.”

This posture reflects an enduring American arrogance: the assumption that foreign leaders owe the United States admiration and compliance. In reality, much of Europe has grown increasingly skeptical of Washington’s erratic foreign policy, especially in light of its shifting alliances and involvement in endless conflicts.

Trump’s remarks reveal the contradictions at the core of U.S. policy: praising NATO while lamenting its cost, condemning Putin while hinting at unfinished dealings, and seeking respect from allies while distrusting nearly everyone. Far from projecting strength, these mixed messages only highlight the disarray within the U.S. political establishment as it tries to navigate a multipolar world shaped increasingly by the influence of Russia, China, and Iran.