NEED TO KNOW

• Trump cannot withdraw from NATO without Congress — troop repositioning is his primary available lever
• Spain and Germany are among the countries that restricted U.S. use of bases and airspace during the Iran war
• Military analysts warn that pulling troops from Western Europe weakens the Russia deterrent the U.S. pays to maintain

WASHINGTON (TDR) — The Trump administration is exploring punishment for NATO allies that withheld support during the Iran war — but the main tool available, repositioning U.S. troops out of Germany and Spain, could cost U.S. strategic interests more than it costs the Europeans.

The big picture: The Wall Street Journal first reported that the White House is considering moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful during Operation Epic Fury and into more supportive allies — a plan that has gained support among senior officials but remains early in conception.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

• Spain and Italy refused U.S. planes involved in the war use of their bases or airspace; France limited its airspace to non-combat flights
• Poland, Romania, Lithuania, and Greece are considered supportive and would likely receive repositioned forces
• The U.S. has approximately 84,000 troops across Europe; withdrawing from NATO requires an act of Congress

Why it matters: U.S. bases in Western Europe aren't bilateral favors — they are the logistical backbone of American power projection and the primary deterrent against Russian aggression on NATO's eastern flank.

• Bases in Germany serve as a hub for U.S. operations across Europe, Africa, and the Middle East
• Moving forces east adds security value for Poland and Romania but degrades the integrated deterrent network the alliance depends on

Driving the news: Trump's posture has escalated from frustration to formal threat, with troop repositioning emerging as the most concrete available mechanism.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

• Trump posted on Truth Social: "NATO WASN'T THERE WHEN WE NEEDED THEM, AND THEY WON'T BE THERE IF WE NEED THEM AGAIN"
• Leavitt called the Iran war "a test" NATO "failed," adding it was "quite sad that NATO turned their backs on the American people"
• Rutte acknowledged allies were "a bit slow" — while arguing most of Europe ultimately supported U.S. logistics and base access for the campaign
• When asked if Trump was considering NATO withdrawal, Leavitt said it was something the president "has discussed"

What they're saying: The alliance divide over Iran reflects a deeper disagreement about what NATO's collective defense obligation actually covers.

• German Chancellor Merz — "We do not want — I do not want — NATO to split. NATO is a guarantor of our security, including and above all in Europe"
• White House spokeswoman Kelly — "He has been disappointed by NATO and other allies' unwillingness to be helpful throughout Operation Epic Fury, even though his effort to destroy the threat posed by Iran is to their benefit"

Yes, but: Many legal scholars and NATO allies consider the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran an act of aggression — not a collective defense trigger under Article 5. European governments that restricted base access were declining a war they had no treaty obligation to join.

• Article 5 covers attacks on member states — not offensive operations a member initiates unilaterally
• Base restrictions applied to offensive Iran missions specifically — not defensive NATO operations

Between the lines: The troop repositioning plan is the lever the administration can actually pull — one available before the Iran war. Trump pulled troops from Germany in 2020; Biden reversed it. The real question isn't whether European governments get punished, but whether the U.S. is willing to degrade its European posture and hand Russia a strategic dividend to settle a score over a war NATO was never asked to authorize.

• Rutte signaled potential European movement on Strait of Hormuz reopening — suggesting the alliance is less broken than Trump's posture implies
• With roughly 70% of Americans supporting NATO — including nearly 6 in 10 Republicans — weakening the alliance carries real domestic cost

What's next:

• No specific countries or timelines confirmed; plan described as "early in conception"
• Rutte continues alliance diplomacy; signaled possible European support for Hormuz reopening
• Full NATO withdrawal requires Congress; no legislation introduced

If pulling U.S. troops from Western Europe weakens Russia deterrence more than it pressures European governments — is the punishment worth the cost, and who defines what allied loyalty requires?

Sources

This report was compiled using information from the Wall Street Journal, ABC News, CNN, Al Jazeera, and the Jerusalem Post.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10