US-Iran war: Did Donald Trump deliberately choose the NATO Summit to reject the ceasefire deal?

US-Iran war: It may appear that a series of developments forced US President Donald Trump to reject the US-Iran ceasefire deal while attending the NATO Summit. However, from the diplomatic perspective, the US administration's decision to initiate a retaliatory attack on Iran signals that Trump tried to hit multiple sparrows with a single arrow.

According to experts, no one would have complained if US President Donald Trump had waited for the end of the NATO Summit and then initiated the retaliatory strikes in Iran, but the US administration decided otherwise to signal to the European Union members to either align with the US government in handling the Middle East crisis or face the repercussions of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz again. They said that US strikes in Iran are a signal to the NATO members of Europe to understand the ‘Power In’ and ‘Power Off’ power that the US has in the aftermath of the US-Iran war, when it comes to the oil and gas supply to the EU members.

US-Iran war: The broad perspective of Donald Trump

Highlighting the broader outcome that the US President Donald Trump possesses due to the US-Iran war, Abhinav Tiwari, Research Analyst at Bonanza, said, “The NATO Summit allowed Trump to combine the Iran issue with his long-standing criticism of European allies. He argued that NATO members were not contributing enough to defence and were not fully supporting the US position on Iran.”

By linking the Middle East crisis to burden-sharing, Trump increased pressure on European countries to align more closely with Washington's strategic objectives.

From a market perspective, Abhinav Tiwari of Bonanza said, Trump's comments appeared to be a negotiation tactic rather than a complete end to diplomacy. Soon after, he said that Iran still wanted to make a deal, indicating that his tough statements were meant to put more pressure on Iran to accept stricter terms. His remarks also pushed oil prices sharply higher.

Trump ensures the US leadership at NATO

Ponmudi R, CEO of Enrich Money, believes US President Donald Trump's decision to use the NATO Summit as the platform to reject or distance himself from any US-Iran ceasefire understanding was more strategic than symbolic.

The Enrich Money expert said the NATO Summit brought together America's closest European allies at a time when geopolitical risks, energy security and trade negotiations are deeply interconnected. By making the statement there, the US administration was reinforcing its leadership position and signalling that any major Middle East policy would ultimately be driven by Washington's strategic interests.

Highlighting the broader objective of the US administration, Anuj Gupta, a SEBI-registered market expert, said, “The US President tried to reprimand EU members, especially Britain, Italy, Germany and Spain, to carve themselves away from any kind of criticisms of the US administration and its stand on the Middle East and the US tariffs. If they do so, the US, being the biggest crude oil producer, may plug into the Middle East crisis to contain the oil supply through the Strait of Hormuz.”

The SEBI-registered market expert said the EU has already cut its oil and energy supply line from Russia after the Russia-Ukraine war. So, they heavily depend on the US crude oil imports if there is a crisis in the Middle East.

Why did Trump choose NATO Summit to reject US-Iran deal?

Highlighting the hidden benefit that Trump was looking at, Ponmudi R of Enrich Money, said, “Europe is currently in a vulnerable position from an energy perspective. Since reducing its dependence on Russian energy following the Russia-Ukraine conflict, many European economies have diversified towards alternative suppliers, including the United States. At the same time, any disruption around the Strait of Hormuz could significantly impact global crude oil flows and increase energy prices.”

The Enrich Money expert said the message was therefore not directed only at Iran. It was equally intended for European allies, reminding them that security, energy and trade are increasingly linked. Countries such as Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain continue to rely on NATO's security framework while also engaging in economic negotiations with the US over tariffs and trade.

Disclaimer: This story is for educational purposes only. The views and recommendations above are those of individual analysts or broking companies, not Mint. We advise investors to check with certified experts before making any investment decisions.