The NATO Summit Wager: A Thoughtful Reply to Jake Broe
- john raymond
- Jun 26
- 2 min read
When I watched Jake Broe’s recent breakdown of the NATO summit, I felt two things at once: a cautious admiration for the hopefulness in his voice—and a mounting skepticism about what he was celebrating.
Jake is earnest, informed, and driven by the right ideals. But I fear this summit is not the success he believes it to be. I fear, more specifically, that the praise lavished on Donald Trump in The Hague may cost us dearly at home. As well as also cost Ukraine, and NATO more generally.
That said, I don’t want to simply dismiss Jake’s read on the moment. In fact, I propose a wager.
Jake believes that Trump’s "productive meeting" with Zelensky, and NATO’s public cohesion around Ukraine all signal a genuine and positive shift.
I, however, believe that the flattery Trump received at the summit serves only to wrongfully inflate his domestic stature and obscure his deep alignment with Putin.
My concern is not what Trump says in the moment—but what he does next. Because if history is any guide, what Trump says and what Trump does rarely align unless the man pulling his strings approves.
So here is the wager: If Trump follows through—if he supports Ukraine militarily, and does not undercut NATO or Zelensky in the weeks and months ahead—then Jake’s optimism is vindicated.
If, however, Trump backpedals, obstructs aid, stalls sanctions, or shifts the conversation back toward appeasing Putin, then I respectfully ask that Jake acknowledge that the praise Trump received at the summit was not only undeserved, but strategically self-defeating for NATO as well as problematic for dealing with Trump and his master in the Kremlin.
This is not about dunking on someone trying to make sense of a chaotic world. It’s about holding our leaders—and our interpretations—accountable to outcomes. We must be vigilant.
Because the real danger is not Trump alone. The danger is how willing we are to pretend he is normal when he is anything but.
Praise can be weaponized. It can be used to rehabilitate someone who should not be trusted with power. And that, I believe, is what just happened at The Hague.
So let us watch what happens next. Let us keep score. Let us test the meaning of flattery against the weight of action.
If Jake is right, I will gladly say so. But if he is not, then I ask—gently, respectfully—that he recalibrate and recognize that the NATO leaders have blundered by burnishing Trump's ego. And them doing so has damaged to the alliance, as well as the Republic.
Comentários