The statement made by United States (US) President Donald Trump during the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Summit held in Ankara, regarding the cessation of trade with Spain, indicates the emergence of a new fracture in transatlantic relations. The statement in question is not merely a bilateral disagreement along the Washington-Madrid line; it is a multifaceted development that should be interpreted thru NATO’s defense spending, the Iran War, the European Union’s (EU) common trade policy, and the tourism economy.[i]
Trump’s characterization of Spain as a “bad partner” and his use of a pressure language that includes not only trade but also visits, reveals that in classical alliance relations, economic tools are increasingly becoming extensions of security policies.[ii] It appears that Trump is targeting the Madrid administration because of Spain’s distant approach to NATO’s new defense spending goals and its refusal to allow the use of its airspace and bases for U.S. military operations against Iran.
At this point, the symbolic significance of the Ankara Summit is great. The summit being held in Türkiye coincides with a period when security discussions on NATO’s eastern and southern flanks have come to the forefront. However, while the summit was expected to strengthen security solidarity, Trump’s outburst toward Spain has made the fault lines within the alliance visible again. This situation shows that NATO is now being discussed not only thru military burden-sharing but also thru areas such as trade, investment, energy, technology, and tourism.
There are three main reasons behind Spain being targeted. Firstly, it is the reluctance of the Madrid administration to increase defense spending to 5% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Second, the government led by Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has been cool to US military demands in the context of the Iran War. The third is that Spain has become one of the most openly dissenting actors within Europe against the Trump administration’s foreign policy line.
It will not be a legally easy step for the U.S. to commercially punish Spain on its own. Because Spain is subject to the EU’s customs and trade policies. Therefore, Washington’s implementation of a comprehensive trade disruption targeting only Spain could directly conflict with the EU’s common trade authority.
The economic data also shows that Trump’s rhetoric could have complex consequences. According to 2025 data, the United States’ exports to Spain amounted to 39.2 billion dollars, while its imports from Spain were at the level of 35.3 billion dollars.[iii] This situation reveals that the United States had a surplus of approximately 3.96 billion dollars in its trade with Spain. Therefore, the complete halt of trade is seen as a step that could negatively impact not only Madrid but also American companies and exporters.
Spain’s economic presence in the U.S. is also noteworthy. Santander, BBVA, Iberdrola, Ferrovial, ACS, and similar Spanish companies operate in the fields of banking, infrastructure, energy, renewable energy, and transportation in the United States. The presence of these companies in the American market shows that the economic relations between the two countries are not limited to the flow of commercial goods. Indeed, Spanish capital investments in the U.S. are an important factor creating mutual dependence between the two countries.
It can be seen that American investors’ interest in Spain has not completely disappeared. One of the most striking examples of this is the US-based asset management company BlackRock, which sees Spain as one of its priority countries for stock investments and has a position of 104 billion euros in Spanish stocks, debt instruments, private market investments, and real assets. This situation indicates a clear divergence between the political rhetoric of the Trump administration and the expectations of international investment circles regarding the Spanish economy.
One of the most striking aspects of the crisis is tourism. Trump’s use of expressions targeting “visits” in addition to trade suggests that the economic pressure strategy could be extended to human mobility. From Spain’s perspective, this is an extremely sensitive area. Indeed, according to data from the Spanish National Statistics Institute (INE), the country welcomed approximately 96.8 million international visitors in 2025, reaching the highest number of tourists in its history. During the same period, international tourist spending amounted to 134.7 billion euros, marking a 6.8% increase compared to the previous year. These figures indicate that the Spanish economy’s dependence on tourism revenues continues and that the sector maintains its strategic importance for the country’s economy.[iv]
American tourists, although not numerically among the top visitors to Spain, stand out due to their high spending capacity. Indeed, according to CaixaBank Research, U.S. citizens accounted for 4.6% of the international tourists visiting Spain in 2024, while they contributed 7.1% of the total international tourism expenditure.[v] This situation shows that the per capita spending level of American visitors is higher than that of many other markets. Therefore, the Washington administration’s deterrent rhetoric, which could also encompass visits, has the potential to exert psychological and economic pressure on the Spanish tourism sector, even if not directly.
The implementation of extensive travel restrictions by the U.S. on an allied NATO country is quite an exceptional scenario with high political costs. Such a step could affect not only Spain but also the EU and the trust relationship within NATO. Therefore, Trump’s statements can be considered more of a negotiation move to pressure Madrid on defense spending and Iran policy rather than a short-term implementable policy.
As a result, the US-Spain tension that emerged at the NATO Ankara Summit indicates that security and the economy are becoming increasingly intertwined in transatlantic relations. The Trump administration evaluates NATO members’ attitudes toward defense spending not only thru military contributions but also thru economic tools such as trade, investment, and tourism. However, Spain’s membership in the EU limits the U.S.’s capacity for trade sanctions, and mutual investments between the two countries make it difficult for the crisis to deepen.
Therefore, Trump’s outburst toward Spain stands out more as a pressure strategy with political message value rather than its feasibility. The Ankara Summit, in this regard, has shown that NATO is facing not only external threats but also economic and political divisions within the alliance. The Spain Crisis indicates that in the upcoming period, the concept of “alliance” in transatlantic relations may be redefined not only by security commitments but also by expectations of economic alignment and political loyalty.
[i] Pamuk, Humeyra, and David Latona. “Trump Orders Halt to US Trade with Spain over NATO Spending, Iran”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-says-he-ordered-cutting-off-all-trade-with-spain-2026-07-08/, (Date Accessed: 12.07.2026).
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] “What Is the Value of US Trade with Spain?”, USAFacts, https://usafacts.org/answers/what-is-the-value-of-us-trade/countries/spain/, (Date Accessed: 12.07.2026).
[iv] Government of Spain. International Tourist Spending Exceeds €134.7 Billion by the End of 2025, 6.8% More than in 2024. La Moncloa, https://www.lamoncloa.gob.es/lang/en/gobierno/news/paginas/2026/20260203-international-tourists-spending.aspx, (Date Accessed: 12.07.2026).
[v] Heymann, David Cesar, and Eduard Alcobé Garcia. ”Uncertainty and US Tourism”, CaixaBank Research, https://www.caixabankresearch.com/en/sectoral-analysis/tourism/uncertainty-and-us-tourism, (Date Accessed: 12.07.2026).
