U.S. Defense Secretary Visits NATO and Ukraine Defense Contact Group
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth visited NATO and the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Brussels, Belgium, on Wednesday. During his visit, Hegseth made several key statements regarding the ongoing war in Ukraine and the future of U.S. involvement.
NATO Membership for Ukraine Unrealistic: Hegseth stated that NATO membership for Ukraine is unrealistic and that the country should abandon hopes of returning to its pre-2014 borders.
Hegseth suggested that Ukraine should prepare for a negotiated settlement with Russia, backed by an international force of troops. However, this force should not include U.S. troops and should not have Article Five protections if they come into contact with Russian forces.
Hegseth emphasized that President Trump intends for Europe to assume the majority of the financial and military responsibilities for Ukraine's defense, including a possible peacekeeping force.
Hegseth called for NATO members to increase their defense spending to 5% of GDP, a level that no member has reached so far. However, he also stated that the U.S. should not go lower than 3% of GDP in its defense spending.
European Allies' Concerns: Some U.S. allies worry that a hasty deal with Russia might not be favorable to Ukraine. Additionally, they are concerned about Trump's apparent belief that European countries should take responsibility for Ukraine's security.
Washington's 31 NATO allies are also concerned about Trump's plans for the organization. During his first term, Trump threatened not to defend any member that doesn't meet NATO guidelines for military spending.
Ukraine's security needs and defense spending will be discussed on Thursday. European allies have increased their military budgets since the war began, but a third of members still haven't reached the target of spending 2% of GDP.
NATO Summit: NATO leaders are expected to agree on new spending targets at their next planned summit in The Hague, Netherlands, on June 24-26.
It remains unclear how much continued military and financial support the Trump administration will provide to Ukraine.
9 Comments
Bella Ciao
“This approach sidelines the interests of Ukraine and reinforces the idea that U.S. military leadership isn’t a priority.”
Katchuka
“The narrative appears to undervalue Ukraine’s struggle for its territorial integrity and independence.”
KittyKat
“It’s disturbing to see European allies pressured into taking on more responsibilities at the expense of U.S. commitments.”
Loubianka
“Talking about rebalancing defense spending while letting Ukraine fend for itself leaves allies in a precarious position.”
Eugene Alta
“By dismissing NATO membership as unrealistic, we risk undermining Ukraine’s hopes and eroding trust in Western promises.”
Africa
“Relying on a negotiated deal with Russia without strong international backing could leave Ukraine in an even worse spot.”
Raphael
“This isn’t a partnership; it’s a shift of burden that leaves Ukraine vulnerable to Russian pressure.”
Coccinella
“Trump’s past threats regarding NATO spending are only making the situation more unstable for our allies.”
ZmeeLove
“Forcing a pre-2014 reality on Ukraine is a denial of how geopolitical realities have evolved since then.”