One of Britain’s most senior former defence chiefs has said that he believes Donald Trump will remain committed to Nato when he becomes the next US President.

Former Air Marshal Greg Bagwell said he hoped Trump’s military advisers would tell the incoming president that leaving Nato would not be a sensible strategic policy.

During his first term as US president, Trump had an often difficult relationship with Nato suggesting that the US could pull out of the alliance unless partner nations started meeting spending targets.

Earlier this year he said that the US would not come to the assistance of Nato countries attacked by Russia if they had failed to reach the two per cent of GDP on defence spending.

Speaking to National Security News’ Security Podcast, the retired air marshal said: “What does it (Trump’s election) mean for NATO?  He has said and done some things that I think he will follow through on this time.”

“And that is to get others to pay their way. That is not all bad, by the way…There are clearly some nations who are not meeting their obligations of a two per cent of GDP. And if Mr. Trump is frightening them into thinking a bit harder about how much they should pay, then that’s got to be a good thing, I suppose. And I think there is an element here of how much does Europe need to step up?

“So maybe this will put some European nations on order to step up their game. There are nations that are a bit close to Russia who are now spending significantly more than two per cent and we shouldn’t kid ourselves that not all of America’s funding goes towards NATO tasks. A lot of its funding is in the Indo-Pacific or other regions of the world so even if you were to be brutal about how much of America’s funding is actually dedicated to NATO, it might be a little bit closer to 2 per cent than some would have you believe.

“Is he going to totally undermine NATO? I think that would be highly silly and highly risky. I’d like to believe that people advising him will suggest that that is not a good thing. NATO still has a purpose. It still has credibility. And I think to get rid of that would be a huge mistake. But I do think there’s going to be some changes. And they were changes that he highlighted eight years ago. And I’m sure he’ll continue to follow through on those.”

The former RAF officer also doubted whether Trump’s claim that he could end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours would come to fruition.

He said any plan which Trump came up with for ending the war would have to be agreed firstly by Ukraine and other western leaders.

“Trump has slightly put himself on the spot here. I don’t think anybody would not want the Ukraine war to stop. I think that we’d all vote for that. The concern I think we’ve all got is what concessions will he give to Putin in order to make that happen? And we’re all a little concerned about his relationship with Putin.

And we know there’s enough evidence  of a relationship that perhaps goes a little deeper than we would be normally comfortable with and some of the people around him. And we know what Putin’s version of peace is. It’s not a great one for Ukraine. So if there is going to be a negotiation behind closed doors in the next three months, because Trump, if he’s not stupid, will use these three months to somehow eat out whatever that might be, even though he’s not yet in power.

“And to what extent, therefore, does there need to be concessions from both sides? And to what extent does America have the authority to give concessions the way that Ukraine doesn’t agree with? And that’ll be a question for other nations. If Trump comes up with a model of peace that is not great for Ukraine, do we all step in behind him because the greater good is peace? Or do we go, no, that’s not good enough?

You’re not going to let him keep the occupied territories. You’re not going to let him maintain a footprint within Ukraine, change the shape and size of Ukraine’s army, dictate what he can have as alliances in the future, and by the way, let me off all my sanctions and all the current criminal court accusations against Putin. Is that the price we pay for peace?”

During The Security Podcast Air Marshal Bagwell also spoke about the crisis in the Middle East and how the US’s relationship with China may develop over the next four years, which can be listened to here in the link.