Transcript [00:00] So, a few days ago, Politico published a [00:03] report. You see it up on your screen [00:05] here. The title was Trump weighs [00:08] consequences for NATO allies on naughty [00:11] list describing how the White House has [00:14] drawn up a tiered list of NATO allies [00:17] sorted by who backed America during the [00:20] Iran war and who didn't. quote, "The [00:23] White House has developed something akin [00:25] to a naughty and nice list of NATO [00:28] countries as the Trump administration [00:30] looks for ways to punish allies who [00:33] refuse to back the Iran war." Now, I'm [00:35] not going to go through this whole [00:36] article. I'd rather just talk about [00:38] what's happening here. The list [00:40] reportedly lays out members [00:42] contributions to the to the alliance and [00:47] reflects Pentagon rhetoric about quote [00:50] model allies deserving special favor [00:53] while others face consequences. [00:56] Now, the coverage of this uh ever since [01:00] the beginning of the war, you know, [01:01] Trump has been talking about NATO not [01:03] helping out and criticizing NATO. [01:05] There's been all the all, you know, [01:07] signaling that maybe we're going to [01:08] change the arrangement. He's been very [01:10] critical of NATO since the beginning of [01:11] the Iran war. And all that coverage has [01:14] been framed as Trump kind of lashing [01:15] out. You know, the allies didn't give [01:17] him what he wanted on Iran. So now he's [01:19] threatening to downgrade the [01:20] relationships. He's angry. He's [01:22] unpredictable. He's transactional. You [01:25] know, the usual the usual [01:27] interpretation. [01:29] And the argument that you'll hear from [01:32] uh from most analysts based on this [01:35] framing is that once the Iran situation [01:38] cools off, the alliance is going to [01:40] stabilize. Trump will move on and NATO [01:42] will muddle through as it always has. [01:44] And this is just a kind of temporary [01:46] temper tantrum. That's that's the way [01:48] it's being perceived. And that's why I [01:50] made this video because this reading is [01:54] incorrect. [01:56] And it's very clear to see why it's [01:59] incorrect because of a document that was [02:02] published uh a few months before the [02:05] Iran war by the White House. And it's [02:07] called the National Security Strategy of [02:11] the United States. It was published in [02:13] November of 2025. [02:16] Okay? And if you read the national [02:17] security strategy, the Trump admin that [02:20] that they published, you'll find that [02:22] this moment that we're in right now and [02:24] this rhetoric that you're hearing, this [02:26] political piece talking about punishing [02:28] allies who aren't stepping up and [02:30] everything that Trump's been saying [02:31] about NATO since the war started, this [02:33] tiered ally list, uh, putting people [02:36] into different categories based on how [02:38] much they helped is not a reaction to [02:41] the Iran war. [02:43] It is actually the implementation of a [02:46] doctrine of a policy doctrine that was [02:48] already written. It was already [02:50] published and it was sitting in plain [02:52] sight. It's all it's it's laid out in [02:54] detail. So today what we're going to do [02:56] is we're going to unpack what the [02:58] doctrine actually says. Now it's a [02:59] 30-page document. We're not going to [03:00] read it. We're going to unpack what that [03:02] doctrine says, why Europe's failure on [03:05] Iran was entirely predictable, [03:08] and why, most importantly, this is not a [03:10] passing temper tantrum. It's not a [03:12] passing storm for the NATO alliance and [03:15] therefore we have to take it very [03:16] seriously because looking downrange we [03:18] have to expect that bec again because it [03:22] was laid out as policy in advance that [03:24] the consequences that they're talking [03:26] about are real. This is not bluster. So [03:29] let's start with the national security [03:30] strategy. Let's just call it the NSS [03:32] because we're going to be mentioning it [03:33] a lot. That's what we'll call this [03:34] document. So the what does the NSS [03:37] actually say? Because most people [03:38] haven't read it. So it opens with a [03:40] direct rebuke of the postcold war [03:43] American foreign policy. It argues that [03:45] Washington's foreign policy [03:46] establishment convinced itself that [03:49] permanent global dominance was something [03:52] achievable and desirable. And in [03:55] pursuing that, it harmed America. It [03:58] hollowed out the very foundations of [04:00] American power. It hollowed out [04:02] America's industrial base, the middle [04:04] class. the sense that America's foreign [04:07] commitments reflected the actual [04:09] interests and values of its people [04:12] rather than the ambitions of a foreign [04:15] policy class insulated from the costs. [04:17] That's what was hollowed out. They lost [04:19] there's a there's a sense that they lost [04:21] sight of that. So that all gets laid out [04:23] in the opening of the document. The NSS [04:26] then explicitly rejects this whole model [04:29] of global hedgemony of America. It [04:33] replaces it with something called [04:35] America first, but it defines the term [04:38] America first with a lot more precision [04:41] than the slogan usually gets. So the [04:43] document states that a proper strategy [04:47] must evaluate, sort, and prioritize. [04:51] Evaluate, sort, and prioritize. That not [04:54] every country, not every region, and not [04:57] every cause can be the focus of American [04:59] attention. [05:02] The purpose of foreign policy, they say, [05:05] is the protection of core American [05:08] interests. Full stop. [05:11] Sounds simple, but it's a clean break [05:13] from the liberal internationalist [05:15] tradition that governed American for [05:17] foreign policy since 1945. No more [05:20] treating NATO as a sacred institution to [05:22] be preserved regardless of whether or [05:25] not it actually serves American [05:27] interests. No more underwriting Europe's [05:30] defense while Europe questions American [05:32] judgment. The NSS is built on 10 [05:35] principles. Among them are focused [05:38] national interest, peace through [05:40] strength, which we're very familiar [05:42] with, flexible realism, primacy of [05:45] nations, and crucially for today's [05:47] discussion, for this video, fairness and [05:51] burden sharing. That's what we're going [05:53] to talk about. Fairness and burden [05:55] sharing. The document is explicit that [05:58] America will no longer tolerate free [06:01] rides, trade imbalances, or allies who [06:05] benefit from American guarantees without [06:08] reciprocating. And it goes further. It [06:10] states that the days of the United [06:13] States propping up the entire world [06:15] order are over. Wealthy allies must [06:18] assume primary responsibility for their [06:20] own regions. [06:22] the HEG commitment which is the the [06:26] commitment that the NATO members will [06:29] pledge 5% that they will spend 5% of [06:32] their GDP on defense is named in the [06:35] document directly as the new baseline. [06:37] That's the framework. Now let's look at [06:39] how Europe is failing this test or just [06:42] failed it in these in these last couple [06:44] of months. So the NSS names the Middle [06:47] East as a core zone of interest. [06:50] Specifically, it talks about the [06:51] straight of Hormuz. The document states [06:54] that America must ensure that Gulf [06:56] energy supplies do not fall into hostile [06:59] hands and that the straight of Hormuz [07:01] must remain open. This was published [07:04] doctrine, not improvised policy. Think [07:07] about that. We're all talking about the [07:08] Straight of Hormuz and it's got to [07:09] remain open. In November, they wrote [07:12] this in the document. And then in early [07:14] 2026, [07:17] Operation Epic Fury, the war we're in, [07:19] the USIsraeli campaign, which built on [07:23] the June 2025 strikes of Midnight [07:25] Hammer, the strikes on the nuclear [07:27] facilities. [07:29] This new campaign, this new war required [07:32] logistical support from European bases. [07:36] And here is what happened. Some of it [07:37] you've heard already. Spain, France, and [07:40] Italy either closed their airspace to US [07:43] aircraft completely or denied use of [07:46] their military bases during the Iran [07:48] war. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro [07:51] Sanchez, who is the target of a lot of [07:54] President Trump's eye of late. So Pedro [07:57] Sanchez confirmed that Spain denied [07:59] permission for bombers and tanker [08:01] aircraft linked to the American [08:04] operation. denied them permission to [08:07] enter or pass through its airspace. He [08:09] was proud of this. We're denying the [08:11] Americans [08:13] use of our airspace. France prevented [08:16] Israel [08:18] from using its airspace to transport [08:20] American weapons. Italy denied landing [08:22] rights to several US bombers at the [08:25] Siggonella base in Sicily. The reaction [08:28] from Washington was very clear. Trump [08:30] called these allies cowards for refusing [08:33] to join the war. [08:35] for refusing to join the war to open the [08:37] straight of Hormuz. Secretary of State [08:39] Marco Rubio said that the administration [08:41] would quote have to re-examine the value [08:44] of NATO. Trump said that he might [08:46] withdraw from NATO altogether. Rubio put [08:48] the strategic logic very plainly. He [08:50] said um when we need them to allow us to [08:53] use their military bases, the answer is [08:55] no. Then why are we in NATO? [08:59] And the emphasis should be on we. Why [09:00] are we in NATO? You know, to anyone [09:03] who's read this document, the NSS, none [09:05] of this was surprising. Everything we've [09:07] seen from Trump and Rubio about NATO [09:10] since the beginning of the Iran war, if [09:11] you read the NSS, you saw it. The [09:13] document had already named this exact [09:16] scenario as the test of allied [09:18] reliability. So, when Trump has said [09:23] that we really don't need the NATO [09:25] nations, we really don't need their [09:26] help. I was just testing them, which [09:29] looked like kind of sour grapes. Like, [09:30] we wanted their help and now they didn't [09:32] give it fine. I didn't need you anyway. [09:34] No, this is already stated as a test in [09:38] the NSS in November. It was stated that [09:42] the willingness to help out in the in [09:44] the in securing the straight of Hormuz [09:46] to allow flow of oil, etc. is already [09:49] listed in there as a test of their [09:51] reliability. The question worth asking [09:53] is why these allies said no. [09:57] And the answer goes deeper than [09:59] geopolitics. [10:01] Here's the conversation that the NSS [10:03] anticipates and that European [10:05] governments are reluctant to have openly [10:08] because the NSS discusses this too. [10:12] It's estimated that there are 46 million [10:14] Muslims in Europe, 6% of the total [10:17] population. [10:19] The Middle East Forum um reports this. [10:24] The share of the European population is [10:27] growing and the political weight it [10:29] carries that this share of their [10:32] population carries is already having a [10:34] huge impact. It's reshaping the foreign [10:36] policy decisions of these European [10:38] nations. That's what we're seeing now. [10:40] How how many big eur foreign policy [10:42] decisions has European nations had to [10:44] make in recent years? And with this [10:45] influx of of uh of Muslims and these [10:49] huge numbers that we all know about, [10:51] this is the first big test of European [10:54] foreign policy since the massive waves [10:58] of of uh of immigration of Muslims. [11:03] And we're seeing that the Muslim [11:05] population is shaping foreign policy [11:07] decisions in a way that is now it's [11:10] impossible to ignore it. Pew research [11:12] projects [11:14] that Sweden will become 30.6% [11:18] Muslim by 2050. France 18%, Germany [11:22] 19.7% and the UK 17.2%. [11:26] Now the political implications are [11:28] already visible. We know that. You can [11:30] see it in the polling. European Muslims [11:32] are most sharply distinguished from [11:35] majority populations on opinions about [11:38] America. That's where they're really [11:39] different. [11:41] They're also very different from main [11:43] from uh native European populations on [11:47] the war on terrorism, on Iran, and on [11:50] the Middle East. This is kind of [11:51] obvious, isn't it? European Muslims give [11:54] the United States lower favorability [11:56] ratings than the general public in [11:59] Europe, the rest of the general public. [12:02] And the Middle East forum was direct [12:03] about the connection during the Iran [12:05] war. European governments are reluctant [12:09] to support American and Israelled [12:11] attacks against Iran because they fear [12:13] the conflict could spill into their own [12:16] streets. That's why they were so adamant [12:18] about refusing to be involved. They have [12:20] these massive Muslim populations and [12:23] they know that if they join in, they're [12:24] going to have they're going to have [12:26] unrest domestically. [12:30] This is all in the Middle East forum [12:31] piece. [12:33] They cited the UK Prime Minister Starmer [12:37] who hosted hundreds of millions hund [12:40] sorry who hosted hundreds of Muslims for [12:43] the end of Ramadan ceremony in [12:45] Westminster Hall. A just a gesture that [12:48] was widely read as preemptive political [12:51] reassurance ahead of his government's [12:53] decision not to authorize offensive [12:56] operations. That's reading from the [12:57] report from the Middle East forum [12:59] report. [13:00] Now, the Trump NSS, this document had [13:03] already diagnosed this problem. In its [13:06] Europe chapter in the 30-page document, [13:09] the document warns that certain NATO [13:12] members will become majority [13:14] non-European within a few decades and [13:16] raises the direct question of whether [13:18] such members will view their alliance [13:21] obligations in the same way as the [13:23] people who originally signed the NATO [13:25] charter. Right? I if Europe is becoming [13:28] increasingly influenced by a Muslim [13:30] street or a it doesn't even have to be [13:32] the majority. If you have a significant [13:34] enough minority of the population that [13:38] is pro- [13:40] Islamic and anti-West, [13:42] are these NATO nations going to continue [13:44] to honor their NATO commitments? And [13:46] that's why this Iran situation was a [13:48] test case. [13:52] Think of how extraordinary this is. [13:56] This document, the NSS, names the [13:59] civilizational question facing Europe [14:01] directly and the Iran war just gave it a [14:05] concrete example, [14:07] a concrete operational example of this [14:10] problem. And when Spain, France, and [14:13] Italy refused to get involved and [14:15] refused to allow America to use their [14:18] airspace, etc. [14:19] I mentioned everything they did. They [14:21] weren't making a purely strategic [14:24] geopolitical calculation. They were [14:26] responding to domestic political [14:28] realities that are shaped by [14:30] demographics. [14:32] The NSS addresses this dynamic in the [14:35] priorities section as well. Everything [14:37] we're seeing was anticipated. [14:39] The document warns against the [14:41] manipulation of immigration systems to [14:44] build voting blocks whose loyalties lie [14:47] outside of Europe. [14:50] The NSS doesn't treat mass migration as [14:53] merely a humanitarian question. It [14:55] treats it as a variable that reshapes [14:58] the the geostrategic [15:01] reliability of these allies. Are they [15:04] still reliable? And in the NSS, it [15:07] anticipates this problem. So if the old [15:09] NATO model is broken, what does the [15:11] Trump doctrine propose instead? Well, [15:13] the NSS document is clear. The goal [15:17] isn't to abandon alliances. It's to [15:20] restructure them around a different [15:23] logic that is more more in line with [15:25] what's actually going on. Okay. The [15:28] document describes targeted partnerships [15:31] that use economic tools to align [15:34] incentives and share burdens with allies [15:38] who are genuinely willing to take [15:39] ownership of their regions. That's the [15:42] language. [15:44] The model that is presented in the NSS [15:47] is explicitly transactional, but the [15:49] transaction isn't just about defense [15:51] spending percentages, 5% or less than [15:54] 5%. It's about strategic alignment and [15:58] reliability, [16:00] demonstrable reliability. The NSS states [16:02] that America will extend more favorable [16:05] treatment on commercial matters, [16:07] technology sharing, defense procurement [16:09] to countries that are willing to take [16:12] more responsibility for their security [16:14] in their neighborhood, in their part of [16:15] the world. That's the precise logic [16:17] behind the tiered list that is now being [16:20] assembled in Washington. Again, this [16:22] isn't a knee-jerk reaction to what's [16:24] happening with Iran. This was the plan [16:27] all along. [16:29] Options reportedly being considered [16:31] include shifting troops. This is all in [16:33] the political piece, shifting troops [16:35] around, scaling back uh joint exercises, [16:38] redirecting military cooperation away [16:41] from less cooperative member states [16:43] towards more reliable ones with [16:46] countries such as Poland and Romania [16:48] seen as beneficiaries. [16:51] Poland fits the NSS model almost [16:53] exactly. It spends well above 3% of GDP [16:56] on defense. It's it's close to five. [16:59] Uh it it welcomed American military [17:01] presence on its soil. It's been [17:02] unambiguous about threats to its region. [17:05] And during the Iran crisis, it didn't [17:07] close its airspace or its bases. The [17:09] Baltic states were the same. These are [17:11] governments that still believe that they [17:13] have a society worth defending, that [17:16] they have a culture worth defending. So [17:17] they act accordingly. they step up. [17:20] Secretary Hexith articulated this before [17:22] the war even began. He said, quote, [17:24] "Exemplary allies such as Israel, South [17:28] Korea, Poland, increasingly Germany, the [17:30] Baltic countries, and others will enjoy [17:33] our special favor. Those who do not [17:36] fulfill their share in collective [17:37] defense will face consequences." [17:41] Now, the word exemplary matters here. [17:43] It's not simply about spending. It's [17:44] about strategic character. The NSS [17:47] envisions America as the country that [17:49] sets the terms, provides the strategic [17:51] backbone, and steps in when the stakes [17:54] are highest, not the country that shows [17:56] up first, stays the longest, and pays [17:59] the most when its allies, you know, [18:02] well, its allies just manage their own [18:04] domestic politics at a safe distance [18:06] from their security concerns. No, [18:09] allies that take ownership of their [18:11] regions, that spend and act [18:14] and don't just defer to the, you know, [18:16] to put it on the Americans to defend [18:18] them. These are the allies that the that [18:21] the Trump doctrine rewards. [18:26] And then there's Israel. And you know, [18:27] it's it's kind of relevant to this uh [18:29] video. So, let me just put in a plug for [18:32] the Israel 365 News YouTube channel. If [18:34] you're not subscribed there, you should [18:35] be. We talk about a lot of geopolitics [18:37] there. I just did another interview with [18:39] Dr. David Wormser today about the [18:41] situation in Iran. You don't want to [18:42] miss that one. I think it's being [18:43] uploaded today or tomorrow. Uh but go [18:46] into the playlist section on that site [18:48] on the Israel 365 news channel and find [18:51] the playlist called Israel, the rise of [18:53] a regional superpower. six videos, six [18:56] short videos, 12 to 15 minutes each, [18:58] which lay out everything that's happened [19:01] since October 7th, in terms of how [19:04] Israel's position in the world has [19:05] changed. And it's very relevant to this [19:07] entire conversation that we are having [19:10] right now. [19:12] So, Israel is held up by the Trump [19:14] administration explicitly in this NSS in [19:17] this document, both explicitly and [19:19] implicitly as the clearest example of [19:21] what an alliance relationship ought to [19:24] look like. The NSS mentions Israel in [19:27] the context of the Abraham Accords. It [19:29] frames Iran's degradation as a joint [19:31] achievement, US and Israel. It notes [19:33] that Iran was already granted [19:36] uh well it was already sorry it notes [19:38] that Iran was already weakened by [19:41] Israeli military action since October [19:43] 7th 2023 before operation midnight [19:45] hammer [19:47] is because of everything Israel was [19:49] doing to the proxies etc. Israel was [19:51] already doing the work before America [19:54] stepped in and that is mentioned in the [19:56] document. And consider what that means [19:58] in terms of the overall [20:01] um policy that this NSS document is is [20:06] uh is pushing. [20:09] Israel took care of a lot of the work [20:10] themselves. Israel does not ask America [20:13] to fight its wars. It asks for weapons. [20:16] It shares intelligence. It asks for [20:18] diplomatic backing. But it acts. Israel [20:21] takes action on its own. It absorbs [20:23] risk. It absorbs casualties. Israel [20:26] invests well over 5% of GDP on defense. [20:30] Israel maintains worldclass intelligence [20:32] in a and a military with genuine [20:34] high-end warfing war fighting [20:36] capability. Which means that [20:41] when Iran's nuclear infrastructure [20:43] needed to be destroyed, Israel had [20:45] already spent years degrading the air [20:47] defenses and the missiles and the [20:50] missiles uh that were standing in the [20:52] way. America's role was to complete the [20:55] mission, not to initiate it. Yes, it was [20:57] a piece that Israel couldn't do. [20:59] But this is exactly what the NSS [21:01] documents talking about. doing your [21:04] share, fighting, [21:06] being willing to take risks as a partner [21:09] of America. That's the NSS model in [21:12] practice. A regional power that takes [21:14] ownership of its neighborhood security, [21:17] that acts decisively when required, that [21:20] comes to the partnership with real [21:22] capability rather than dependency. Of [21:25] course, we can't do everything America [21:26] can do, [21:28] but we don't just rely on America to [21:31] defend us. Contrast that with Europe. [21:33] Now, Spain closes its bases to the to [21:37] America. France blocks weapons [21:39] transfers. Italy denies landing rights [21:42] to the US. To the US. Countries that [21:45] have outsourced their own security to [21:47] the United States for 80 years are now [21:50] citing international law and domestic [21:52] political pressure as excuses, as [21:55] reasons to withhold the log the to [21:58] withhold the the logistical access that [22:01] makes American power projection [22:03] possible. The NSS explicitly condemns [22:06] this. It describes, and this is in [22:08] November before it happened, it [22:10] describes allies who benefit from [22:12] American security guarantees but refuse [22:15] to support American interests as the [22:17] very definition of the problem that this [22:20] document was written to solve. [22:24] I don't know if these European leaders [22:26] read the document. [22:28] It like predicts their behavior. It [22:31] warns it. It warns against it. The NSS [22:34] documents language on fairness is [22:36] unambiguous. The arrangement must work [22:38] in both directions or it will be [22:41] restructured until it does. Israel is [22:45] the uh counterweight or or the rebuttal, [22:48] right? It's the opposite of the European [22:51] model. It's what genuine burden sharing [22:54] looks like. A country that earns its [22:57] alliance rather than assumes it. The NSS [23:00] closes with an argument that gets less [23:02] attention than the geopolitical [23:03] sections, but it might be the most [23:06] important passage in the whole document. [23:07] It argues that long-term security [23:10] depends on the restoration of American [23:14] spiritual and cultural health. That a [23:17] nation without confidence in its own [23:19] identity and purpose cannot project [23:21] power or sustain alliances over time. [23:26] The same logic applied outward runs [23:29] through everything we've discussed. The [23:31] allies on the right side of Washington's [23:32] list aren't simply the ones who spend [23:34] more money. And this is this is the key [23:37] point here. That's not the only thing [23:39] that makes them on the right side. [23:40] They're also states that are that still [23:42] believe in standing for something worth [23:46] defending. They believe in defending [23:47] their society, their culture, and [23:49] they're prepared to act on that belief [23:51] when the moment demands it. [23:54] So the the cultural erosion of Europe is [23:56] not separate from the geopolitical [23:59] timidity. It's the same thing. Europe's [24:02] refusal to support the Iran operation [24:04] wasn't it wasn't a disagreement about [24:06] international law or logistics. It was a [24:09] signal of the much deeper problem. These [24:12] are governments that are managing their [24:14] foreign policies around the domestic [24:17] political consequences of the [24:19] transformation of their societies [24:21] demographically and they're hoping that [24:23] the American security guarantees will [24:25] remain there regardless of how they [24:27] behave. [24:30] And the Trump NSS says that that era is [24:33] over. This tiered ally list is the first [24:36] concrete example, but I don't think [24:38] it'll be the last. Again, this was all [24:40] laid out in November and then here comes [24:43] the Iran war and they failed the test. [24:47] Um, yeah. Anyway, so that's where we [24:49] are. [24:51] Should get more interesting. Keep [24:53] watching. Thank you for uh for watching [24:55] the channel, helping it grow. Please [24:57] like and subscribe and share this video [24:59] so that you can tell everyone what we're [25:00] doing on this channel. Hope it was [25:02] helpful. God bless.
