Naughty or nice: How Donald Trump judges his allies
His ranking system for his allies runs on a singular question: Are you good for America, or more specifically, good for Trump? Find out more here
- Apr 23, 2026,
- Updated Apr 23, 2026 1:27 PM IST
What does a country have to do to stay in US President Donald Trump's good graces? Turns out, decades of diplomacy, shared values, and mutual defence treaties don't matter much when it comes to Trump. His ranking system for his allies runs on a singular question: Are you good for America, or more specifically, good for Trump? Countries, especially NATO allies, are learning this the hard way. While some are thriving, others are panicking and Googling "how to get a Mar-a-Lago invite."
That's right. As the war in West Asia rages on, the White House has developed something similar to a "naughty and nice" list of NATO countries ahead of NATO chief Mark Rutte's Washington visit, POLITICO reported.
It also includes an overview of members' contributions to the alliance and places them into tiers, three diplomats and a US official aware of the matter told the publication. The list is being seen as an attempt by Trump to hit two birds with a single arrow: making good on his threats against allies who didn't help him during the Iran war and pressuring the increasingly frayed NATO.
Find out: US-Iran talks soon?
The report mentioned that US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth initially floated the idea in December. At the time, Hegseth said, "Model allies that step up, like Israel, South Korea, Poland, increasingly Germany, the Baltics and others, will receive our special favour."
He added, "Allies that still fail to do their part for collective defence will face consequences."
One of the diplomats said that the list is strikingly similar to Hegseth's idea, saying, "The White House has a naughty and nice paper, so I guess the thinking is similar."
A European diplomat said that the White House doesn't seem to have any "concrete ideas" of what the favours or consequences could be. "Moving troops is one thing, but it mainly punishes the US, doesn't it?"
Meanwhile, the White House has made its frustration over the lack of support from its "allies" clear.
“While the United States has always been there for our so-called allies, countries we protect with thousands of troops have not been there for us throughout Operation Epic Fury,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said. She added, "President Trump has made his thoughts on this unfair dynamic clear, and as he said, the United States will remember."
While it is not clear which country will be classified neatly as a good ally or a bad one, Romania and Poland could end up being some of the biggest beneficiaries since both are in Trump's good books and would welcome more American troops. Bulgaria also supported American logistics in the West Asia region.
DON'T MISS | ‘Won’t happen overnight…’: Pirojsha Godrej on India’s self-sufficiency amid Iran war
Allies which could have it hard are Spain, the UK and France, as they either rejected or stalled US requests for help. Hegseth initially used the rhetoric to refer to NATO allies who increased defence spending in keeping with the alliance's 5 per cent targets championed by Trump.
“In doing so, we will empower those allies as they step up in the defense of our shared interests while also strengthening incentives for other allies to do their part.”
According to two European diplomats aware of the matter, classifying allies could give the US options to pull back troop deployments, joint exercises or military sales from "bad" allies to the "good" ones. A third diplomat said that Hegseth also used the term "model ally" in meetings with NATO members.
It would also give Trump more perspective to differentiate between members who supported US efforts in Iran, including putting an end to the blockade at the Strait of Hormuz and allowing use of military bases, versus those who did not.
Joel Linnainmäki, a former Finnish official who worked on Finland's 2023 accession into NATO, said that Trump and his team is busy "trying to extract themselves from their self-inflicted quagmire." He added, “Likely the administration does not have the bandwidth to open another hostile front with Europe as long as the war continues.”
What does a country have to do to stay in US President Donald Trump's good graces? Turns out, decades of diplomacy, shared values, and mutual defence treaties don't matter much when it comes to Trump. His ranking system for his allies runs on a singular question: Are you good for America, or more specifically, good for Trump? Countries, especially NATO allies, are learning this the hard way. While some are thriving, others are panicking and Googling "how to get a Mar-a-Lago invite."
That's right. As the war in West Asia rages on, the White House has developed something similar to a "naughty and nice" list of NATO countries ahead of NATO chief Mark Rutte's Washington visit, POLITICO reported.
It also includes an overview of members' contributions to the alliance and places them into tiers, three diplomats and a US official aware of the matter told the publication. The list is being seen as an attempt by Trump to hit two birds with a single arrow: making good on his threats against allies who didn't help him during the Iran war and pressuring the increasingly frayed NATO.
Find out: US-Iran talks soon?
The report mentioned that US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth initially floated the idea in December. At the time, Hegseth said, "Model allies that step up, like Israel, South Korea, Poland, increasingly Germany, the Baltics and others, will receive our special favour."
He added, "Allies that still fail to do their part for collective defence will face consequences."
One of the diplomats said that the list is strikingly similar to Hegseth's idea, saying, "The White House has a naughty and nice paper, so I guess the thinking is similar."
A European diplomat said that the White House doesn't seem to have any "concrete ideas" of what the favours or consequences could be. "Moving troops is one thing, but it mainly punishes the US, doesn't it?"
Meanwhile, the White House has made its frustration over the lack of support from its "allies" clear.
“While the United States has always been there for our so-called allies, countries we protect with thousands of troops have not been there for us throughout Operation Epic Fury,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said. She added, "President Trump has made his thoughts on this unfair dynamic clear, and as he said, the United States will remember."
While it is not clear which country will be classified neatly as a good ally or a bad one, Romania and Poland could end up being some of the biggest beneficiaries since both are in Trump's good books and would welcome more American troops. Bulgaria also supported American logistics in the West Asia region.
DON'T MISS | ‘Won’t happen overnight…’: Pirojsha Godrej on India’s self-sufficiency amid Iran war
Allies which could have it hard are Spain, the UK and France, as they either rejected or stalled US requests for help. Hegseth initially used the rhetoric to refer to NATO allies who increased defence spending in keeping with the alliance's 5 per cent targets championed by Trump.
“In doing so, we will empower those allies as they step up in the defense of our shared interests while also strengthening incentives for other allies to do their part.”
According to two European diplomats aware of the matter, classifying allies could give the US options to pull back troop deployments, joint exercises or military sales from "bad" allies to the "good" ones. A third diplomat said that Hegseth also used the term "model ally" in meetings with NATO members.
It would also give Trump more perspective to differentiate between members who supported US efforts in Iran, including putting an end to the blockade at the Strait of Hormuz and allowing use of military bases, versus those who did not.
Joel Linnainmäki, a former Finnish official who worked on Finland's 2023 accession into NATO, said that Trump and his team is busy "trying to extract themselves from their self-inflicted quagmire." He added, “Likely the administration does not have the bandwidth to open another hostile front with Europe as long as the war continues.”