The Capstone Part 3—To Prove That NATO Has Learned Its Lesson, Rutte Must Resign His Commission
- john raymond
- Sep 23, 2025
- 2 min read
NATO cannot fully move into its capstoned phase while burdened by leadership that failed the critical tests caused by Trump 2.0.
Mark Rutte may be largely competent, even a decent person, but he presided over an era when the alliance lost coherence, faltered in signaling, and allowed ambiguity to become a weapon against itself. Now, if NATO is serious about proving—to itself and to the world—that it has learned its lesson, Rutte must resign. MUST.
Accountability at the highest level is the only way to show everyone that failure in a civilizational war is not tolerated.
Why Rutte Must Go
Rutte’s tenure has been defined not by catastrophe, but by drift. And drift is fatal in the context of civilizational war. The alliance failed to unify quickly under Trump’s second presidency; it failed to anticipate his cartoonish sabotage; it failed to signal strength when ambiguity was turned into an offensive tool.
These are not trivial mistakes. They cut to the heart of NATO’s credibility. And simpley put, Rutte did not meet the moment. His resignation is not about punishment for malice; it is about consequence for misjudgment and inertia.
The Capstone Standard
The alliance has entered its capstoned phase: a unified analytic and operational posture that treats every executive intervention—whether domestic or foreign—as a potential battlefield action. The capstone removes ambiguity, removes excuses, and replaces them with clarity.
Trump’s cartoonish evil forced this clarity upon NATO, the EU, and Ukraine. Rutte, by contrast, failed to deliver clarity when it was most needed. Under the capstone standard, leadership is conditional on outcomes. By that metric, his tenure is over.
Lessons from History
Wars demand turnover. Lincoln dismissed McClellan. Churchill replaced Chamberlain. The Allies reshuffled commanders after Dunkirk and Kasserine. None of those leaders were devoid of talent; they simply were not the leaders needed for the next phase of war.
NATO now enters a new phase, one that demands ruthless honesty, analytic courage, and the ability to operationalize strategy without delay. Rutte’s record proves he was never going to be that leader. To keep him in place would repeat the errors of the past.
Accountability as Strategy
A clean break at the top is more than symbolism. It tells every NATO member and every adversary that the alliance has absorbed its lessons: incompetence will not be rewarded, inertia will not be excused, and leadership is earned by outcomes, not tenure.
NATO can honor Rutte with a respectful send-off, but his departure must be firm. It is proof that NATO will not sit idle, that it will not tolerate missteps, and that it prizes wisdom, diligence, and strength above all else.
If Rutte Is the Leader He Wants to Be, He Must Resign
To prove to itself and to the world that it has learned its lesson, NATO must demand Rutte’s resignation. His continued leadership would signal that failure is excusable. His removal would signal the opposite: that NATO has capstoned, that it has embraced clarity, and that it will no longer stumble into betrayal and drift.
The alliance must show it is serious. The capstone demands nothing less.
Comments