Bolton Breaks Silence About Trump’s NATO Strategy

André Gustavo Stumpf from Brasília, Brasil, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

( – John Bolton, a former national security adviser, has slightly minimized the significance of ex-President Trump’s threats to withdraw from NATO, attributing it to Trump’s tendency for brief focus, which might prevent him from executing his threats to leave the alliance.

Trump has consistently criticized NATO, urging member countries to augment their financial contributions and hinting that their failure to do so might lead him to facilitate a Russian invasion. Despite bipartisan disapproval of his remarks, Trump insists that such threats are merely part of his negotiation strategy.

Bolton, having served under Trump, expressed concerns on Wednesday that Trump might lead the U.S. to exit NATO unless something diverts his attention.

“In a potential second term, I anticipate he would act on this quite promptly,” Bolton remarked during a MeidasTouch interview on Wednesday. “To prevent a withdrawal from NATO, the strategy would be to divert his focus. Given his propensity for distraction, this approach might temporarily succeed until the idea resurfaces in his mind.”

Furthermore, Bolton speculated that a second presidency under Trump might witness the realization of previously unachieved pledges, with possible adverse outcomes. He cautioned that Trump might seek vengeance against those he perceives as adversaries.

“Trump often mentions on the campaign trail his intention to seek vengeance against those he clashed with during his first term or thereafter,” Bolton stated. “He frames it as defending his supporters, but it’s clear that any retaliatory actions would primarily serve Trump’s interests.”

The debate over Trump’s comments on NATO has led to divisions within the Republican Party. Some members dismiss the remarks as humor or sarcasm, while others seriously consider the potential for Trump to disengage the U.S. from the longstanding military alliance.

Senator James Lankford (R-Oklahoma) opposed the notion of distancing from allies in February, stating, “There’s no justification for turning our backs on our allies. This has never happened before and should not happen. While it’s crucial for every member to meet their commitments, suggesting that we would abandon them to threats if they don’t is entirely inappropriate.”

Copyright 2024,