Last Updated on 14 seconds ago by TodayWhy Editorial
President Trump spent the NATO summit in Ankara demanding that the United States cut off all trade with Spain and renewing his call for the U.S. to take control of Greenland. So why did a summit built to project unity turn into a public dressing-down of one ally, and why did Trump revive a territorial demand against another?
What happened in Ankara on July 8
NATO leaders gathered in the Turkish capital on July 7 and 8, 2026, for what allies hoped would be a display of solidarity around rising defense budgets and continued support for Ukraine. Instead, President Trump used a joint appearance with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte to single out Spain, calling it a “terrible partner in NATO” and telling Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to “cut off all trade with Spain, please, including visits.” He also declared he was unhappy with NATO more broadly, citing both the Greenland dispute and what he described as allies refusing to back the U.S. military campaign against Iran.
Spain’s government responded through the prime minister’s office, telling reporters that bilateral relations with the U.S. remain mutually beneficial and that Madrid does not expect that to change. Rutte, sitting beside Trump, pushed back gently on the criticism, noting that Spain had already raised its defense spending to 2% of GDP and calling that “a huge step.”
Why Trump singled out Spain
The immediate trigger is defense spending. Last year’s NATO summit in The Hague set a new target: 5% of GDP on defense-related spending by 2035, split between 3.5% on core military budgets and 1.5% on broader security infrastructure. Spain is the only one of NATO’s 32 members that did not commit to that target, and new figures released just before the Ankara summit showed Slovenia, Belgium, Spain and the Czech Republic still short of even the older 2% goalpost.
Trump has treated defense spending as the central measure of alliance loyalty since returning to office, and Spain’s holdout status makes it an easy target. But he layered a second grievance on top: frustration that European allies, in his account, refused U.S. requests for support during the American strikes on Iran. “Nobody wanted to help,” Trump told reporters, adding that only “the very small countries” had offered assistance. European officials have said they largely honored existing commitments to U.S. forces despite not being consulted before the conflict began.
The Greenland dispute, again
Trump also renewed a demand that has strained the alliance for more than a year: that the U.S. take control of Greenland, the semi-autonomous Danish territory. “We need it for protection of the world, not just the United States,” he told reporters, arguing the Arctic island matters more to American security than to Denmark’s. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen rejected the idea directly, saying Greenland “is, of course, not for sale” and that Denmark is “ready to defend every inch of NATO, including our own territory.” Rutte said Washington and Copenhagen would continue talks about an expanded American footprint on the island, short of any transfer of sovereignty.
Because NATO exists to counter external threats, a member state’s president publicly pressuring another member over its own territory is an unusual dynamic for the alliance to absorb, and it is the second consecutive summit where the Greenland question has resurfaced.
How Rutte is managing the friction
Rutte’s approach throughout the summit was to redirect Trump’s anger toward a win he could claim credit for. He repeatedly credited Trump with pushing European members to raise defense spending, telling him at one point to “grab the win. It’s there,” and citing that European allies and Canada increased defense spending by roughly $139 billion last year alone. Rutte also defended the new U.S. strikes on Iran as “totally crucial,” aligning himself with Trump’s position even as he tried to keep Spain inside the tent.
That balancing act reflects the wider shift NATO has been negotiating since last year’s summit: what officials call “burden shifting,” in which European members and Canada take on a larger share of financing Ukraine and their own defense, while the U.S. reduces its troop presence on the continent.
What it means for the Iran ceasefire
Trump’s comments in Ankara went beyond alliance politics. He also declared the fragile ceasefire arrangement with Iran effectively over, saying “to me, I think it’s over. I don’t want to deal with them,” after new U.S. strikes followed Iranian attacks on three merchant tankers in the Strait of Hormuz. That statement complicates the 60-day negotiating window that Washington and Tehran had opened after signing a memorandum of understanding in June, and it is a significant escalation from a summit that was originally billed as focused on Ukraine and defense spending.
FAQ
Why did Trump want to cut off trade with Spain?
Spain is the only NATO member that has not committed to the alliance’s target of spending 5% of GDP on defense by 2035, and Trump has also accused Spain of failing to support the U.S. military campaign against Iran.
What did Trump say about Greenland?
He repeated his argument that the U.S. should control Greenland for security reasons, calling it “a big problem for us.” Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said Greenland is “not for sale.”
Is the Iran ceasefire still in place?
Trump said at the summit that he considers the ceasefire arrangement with Iran to be over, following new U.S. strikes after Iranian attacks on tankers in the Strait of Hormuz.
Did the summit end in disunity?
Not officially. NATO’s formal summit declaration reaffirmed unity and continued support for Ukraine, including a pledge of roughly $75 billion (70 billion euros) in additional military support for 2026 and 2027. But Trump’s remarks about Spain and Greenland overshadowed that message in most coverage of the summit.