NATO leaders left Turkiye on Wednesday after reaffirming their commitment to collective defense, but uncertainty now hangs over the alliance following US President Donald Trump's disruptive remarks.

北约各国领导人周三离开土耳其，此前他们重申了集体防御承诺，但美国总统唐纳德·特朗普一番极具分裂性的言论，让整个联盟前景蒙上一层不确定性。

Divisions over defense spending and the security commitments of the United States have raised questions about the cohesion of the alliance and even whether leaders would convene another summit next year.

各国在防务开支、美国安全保障义务两方面产生分歧，外界开始质疑北约内部凝聚力，甚至不确定明年能否如期举办下一届峰会。

Although the 32-member bloc sought to project unity through its "ironclad commitment" to the collective defense principle, the summit highlighted increasingly divergent priorities between Washington and its European allies.

这个拥有32个成员国的同盟试图借对集体防御原则“牢不可破的承诺”对外塑造团结形象，但本次峰会清晰暴露，美国与欧洲盟友的核心诉求分歧正不断扩大。

Trump's repeated criticism of NATO, renewed demands for Europe to shoulder more of the budgetary burden, and public rebukes of individual allies reinforced concern that the trans-Atlantic relationship is becoming more transactional than strategic.

特朗普多次公开抨击北约，再度要求欧洲承担更多防务经费压力，还当众点名批评部分盟国，这加深了外界的担忧：跨大西洋关系正在从战略伙伴关系，彻底偏向纯粹的利益交易关系。

Speaking in Ankara before joining alliance leaders, Trump made clear that his frustrations with NATO had not eased.

在赶赴北约领导人集体会谈前，特朗普于安卡拉发表讲话，直言自己对北约的不满丝毫没有缓解。

"Despite the fact that I'm very upset with NATO, that we pay far, far too much, billions and billions of dollars too much — because it's unfair — we protect them, but they're not there for us," he said.

他表示：“我对北约非常不满，我们付出的代价实在过高，白白多掏了数十亿美元，这非常不公平。我们为他们提供安全庇护，可他们却不愿对等付出。”

Trump also renewed his call for US control of Greenland, an autonomous territory of NATO member Denmark, while criticizing Spain over defense spending and its position on the Iran war, even threatening to cut off all trade with Madrid.

特朗普再度提出由美国接管格陵兰岛（北约成员国丹麦的自治领地），同时指责西班牙防务投入不足、在伊朗冲突上立场与美国相悖，甚至威胁断绝与马德里的全部贸易。

The remarks contrasted sharply with efforts by NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and European leaders to present a united front, underscoring growing disagreements over burden-sharing, strategic priorities and the future balance of responsibilities within the alliance.

这番表态和北约秘书长马克·吕特、欧洲各国领导人力求展现统一战线的努力形成强烈反差，凸显各方在防务分摊、战略重心、联盟权责分配等问题上分歧持续加剧。

Domestic pressures

国内层面的压力

Tom Harper, a lecturer in international relations at the University of East London, said the dispute over defense spending has become increasingly tied to domestic political and economic pressures.

东伦敦大学国际关系讲师汤姆·哈珀表示，这场防务开支争端，如今和各国国内政治、经济压力深度绑定。

European governments face mounting political risks if higher military spending comes at the cost of public services, Harper said.

哈珀称，欧洲各国如果以削减公共服务为代价增加军费，将面临巨大的国内政治风险。

"If increased defense spending coincides with cuts to social services and education, this will likely impose domestic costs on European governments, which they may be unwilling to pay, especially should they be facing election campaigns," he said.

他说：“倘若增加国防开支就要削减社保、教育投入，各国政府都不愿承担这样的国内代价，尤其是恰逢大选周期时。”

"You could say it's an example of the age-old debate over guns or butter."

“这就是经典的‘大炮与黄油’取舍难题。”

Harper also argued that the economic benefits of increased military spending could flow disproportionately to the US.

哈珀还提出，军费扩容带来的经济红利，绝大部分会流向美国。

"It is quite likely that American companies would be the primary beneficiaries of increased spending, which is one of the reasons why Washington has been keen for NATO members to increase their defense expenditure," he said.

他表示：“美国企业大概率会成为军费上涨的主要受益者，这也是华盛顿极力推动北约各国提高防务开支的原因之一。”

Matthew Arnold, a policy analyst and visiting fellow at the London School of Economics and Political Science, questioned whether NATO members could realistically sustain significantly higher defense spending.

伦敦政治经济学院政策分析师、访问学者马修·阿诺德质疑，北约各国是否有能力长期维持大幅上涨的军费。

"The fiscal concerns are serious," he said, warning that sustained increases in military expenditure could worsen debt burdens and social tensions, while much of the increased procurement would initially benefit large defense contractors, many of them based in the US.

他称：“各国财政隐患十分严峻。持续增加军费会加重债务压力、激化社会矛盾，而且新增军备采购订单，初期大多流入美国大型军工企业。”