An extra $6.3 trillion in defense spending and an expanded Golden Dome demonstrate how the Trump administration will lead through 2026 and beyond—if midterm voters provide the mandate.

The current administration has made a decisive strategic shift by narrowing the US mission in the Middle East to a single, universally understood imperative: a sustained strategic commitment to preventing the Iranian regime from acquiring a nuclear weapon. This laser focus on nuclear denial—a goal that transcends domestic partisanship and the ideological divides between the United States and its European allies—is what makes President Donald Trump’s promise of a short war fundamentally credible. Unlike the open-ended “forever wars” of the past, this mission now has a clear finish line that policymakers and the public can rally behind. 

The tangible results of this strategy are already taking hold. With the 10-day ceasefire in Lebanon announced on April 16, the apparent reopening of the Strait of Hormuz on April 17, and US-Iran talks soon to resume in Pakistan, there has been a renewed sense of hope that the phase of regional disruption is coming to an end. The investment community has taken note; the NASDAQ and S&P 500 hit all-time highs on April 17, a powerful signal that world markets expect the Iran conflict to reach a conclusion soon, even as the prospect of peace will continue to ebb and flow and the exact timeline for a final settlement remains fluid.

Rather than drifting back into a protracted regional conflict, Trump should pursue a high-stakes strategic maneuver to leverage the current momentum of a ceasefire and surging market optimism into a victory in the 2026 midterm elections. While the United States’ willingness to take further effective actions to prevent Iran and other aspirants from Iranian nuclear blackmail portends well for the Republican Party, it is likely not enough on its own to overturn the significant headwind the GOP is experiencing. After a year of political chaos at home and abroad, Trump’s approval ratings have dipped to record lows, and many Americans appear fed up with his party. Prediction markets currently give the Democrats an 86 percent chance of flipping the House; the Senate is a much tighter contest, with a 53 percent chance of a Democratic majority.

To reverse this state of affairs, Trump can and should prepare an “October Surprise” before the election: a practical overhaul of NATO. This is not a political maneuver to trick the electorate, but a transparent demonstration of a governing philosophy that delivers tangible security and economic stability. By doubling down on his “Peace Through Strength” doctrine and systematically phasing in the agreed 5 percent of GDP defense spending mandate over the next 10 years—instead of waiting until 2035 to begin doing so—Trump will provide voters with a clear choice to support a proven, high-readiness alliance architecture. In doing so, he gains the early start required to secure the midterms and protect the Free World. 

No One Benefits from Cutting NATO in Half—Except Its Enemies

The emerging concept of a “European NATO” is being framed by its proponents as a strategic evolution—a way for Europe to maintain American nuclear deterrence while demanding a more robust role in being informed and consulted on major issues concerning the alliance. Conversely, the Trump administration has noted that some NATO allies have been unhelpful in supporting the Iran war and should be held accountable. From Trump’s perspective, a separate European NATO is a hollow strategic gesture rather than a genuine effort to become independent of US security guarantees. 

However, rather than dismissing the European concept outright, Trump could also leverage it as an opportunity to incorporate their wishes into the existing NATO framework. After all, the bedrock of the alliance remains the Article 5 principle of collective defense. While the president has made it clear that his commitment to Article 5 is conditional on allies meeting their financial obligations, this “European NATO” initiative offers a path to fulfill those requirements. To uphold its purpose, the alliance must work as a singular, cohesive machine rather than a fractured set of regional blocs. European NATO members’ legitimate desire to be more deeply consulted and informed on strategic decisions can and should be incorporated into existing NATO protocols without the need for a redundant creation of a separate European-only defense structure. At a time when the “Axis of Disruption“—China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea—is tightening its bond, any move to divide the West into two separate NATO alliances would be strategically suicidal.

The 5 Percent Solution: Start Now, Not in 10 Years 

Trump’s securing of a commitment from NATO members at the 2025 annual summit in The Hague, Netherlands, to allocate 5 percent of their respective GDPs to defense is the most significant nonpartisan achievement of this administration. Trump should use it as a key element in his midterm messaging strategy, as burden-sharing has always had wide appeal across party lines. Indeed, the 5 percent pledge is unusually attractive for him to use now for two reasons. First, no one else can claim anywhere nearly as much credit as Trump can in having NATO members agree to this threshold. Second, unlike other hot-button political issues, virtually no one in the Democratic Party can oppose it.

Importantly, Trump has taken another step to show that the 5 percent GDP target by 2035 is far from adequate on its own. Money arriving 10 years from now is too late to deal with the rapidly increasing threats and instabilities facing the world today. The administration’s commitment is already visible in the Fiscal Year 2027 $1.5 trillion defense budget proposal—representing a roughly twofold increase from the budget for the current year. By utilizing a $350 billion reconciliation package to bypass traditional legislative gridlock, the President is fast-tracking the modernization of the Department of Defense and the deployment of the Golden Dome. This massive domestic investment provides the leverage necessary to demand that allies follow suit with their own front-loaded contributions. 

While this proposed budget could eventually be refined, Trump should insist that NATO allies start systematically increasing their annual defense spending immediately. I have previously proposed a practical schedule of the same annual increase over the next 10 years, so as to reach the 5 percent target by 2035. The key purpose of this endeavor is to generate $6.3 trillion in additional funds over the next decade for our allies to enhance the defenses of their own countries, as well as collective defense across NATO. These funds would be far more than enough to meet the requirements sought by the European NATO proponents. 

Trump’s Golden Dome Could Cover All of NATO

The other critical element in the “October Surprise” would be an announcement of the internationalization of the proposed Golden Dome missile defense system. As I have argued previously, a unified shield is strategically, technically, and financially more efficient than a fragmented one. Strategically, it bolsters deterrence by signaling that an attack on any member would draw the collective counter-attacks of the full alliance. Technically, it leverages allied satellite and ground resources to provide greater resilience, redundancy, and access to leading technologies. Financially, the stakes are even higher if the alliance fails to forgo the unnecessary duplication of the space segment; the United States would have to pay 66 percent more for its own Golden Dome, while our NATO allies would pay 24 percent more for their respective systems.

Thus, pivoting the “Golden Dome for America” into a “Golden Dome for NATO” eliminates costly duplication and creates an effective defensive perimeter against the next generation of hypersonic threats. It binds the alliance together through shared high-tech infrastructure rather than just aging treaties. 

Trump’s “Triple Crown” Midterm Strategy

By securing these commitments now, Trump can walk into the midterm elections with a “Triple Crown” of achievements that demonstrate an administration that is proactive, resourceful, and decisive: 

• Economic Growth: Sustaining the market rally by removing the “tail risk” of a nuclear Iran;
• Global Leadership: Proving that NATO can be fixed by modernizing and effectively reworking its core structure;
• Security Innovation: Initiating a NATO Golden Dome that can deter and defend against adversarial missile threats of all classes. 

Ultimately, this fundamental exchange—offering deeper NATO consultation in exchange for front-loaded financial commitments—is already the governing principle behind Trump’s key security initiatives, from the 5 percent GDP mandate to the $1.5 trillion defense budget. By securing $6.3 trillion over the next 10 years from NATO members, while preserving the United States as the largest stakeholder, Trump can satisfy the allies’ desire for closer consultation while sidelining domestic critics. At the same time, European NATO members’ major wish of being better informed and consulted is met.

Above all, this strategy proves Trump is the leader capable of forcing the alliance to function as the integrated, high-readiness machine it was originally built as in 1949. It recasts NATO as a fully-funded pillar of Western security, creating a cooperative atmosphere that the opposition will find impossible to contest. Strategic audacity is a hallmark of this administration; Trump is now poised to use it to secure a victory in the upcoming midterms.

About the Author: Brian Chow

Brian G. Chow is an independent policy analyst with more than 190 publications, including numerous monographs, on space and other national security issues. He is a former senior physical scientist at the RAND Corporation, a role he held for 25 years. In addition to providing routine consulting services to government agencies through RAND, he was independently appointed—separate from his RAND work—as a consultant to the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, the President’s Science Advisor, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy at different times, advising them on specific high-level initiatives. He holds a Ph.D. in physics from Case Western Reserve University and an MBA with distinction and a Ph.D. in finance from the University of Michigan. He can be reached on X at @briangchow.

The post Could NATO Reform Be a ‘Trump Card’ for a Midterm Win? appeared first on The National Interest.