Related videos:
The President of the United States, Donald Trump, once again placed the term “paper tiger” at the center of international debate, this time referring to NATO, amid tensions with his European allies over lack of support in the war against Iran.
The expression, far from being improvised, is part of a rhetorical pattern that the leader has been using in various geopolitical scenarios. This Tuesday, interviewed by The Telegraph, Trump used it again, but this time directed at his allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Months ago, Trump used that same term to describe Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin, in the context of the war in Ukraine. At that time, the goal seemed clear: to challenge the image of Moscow as a military power and project weakness after a prolonged conflict that did not achieve a swift victory.
However, the transfer of that language to NATO introduces a different nuance. In this case, it is not about discrediting a direct adversary, but rather increasing pressure on traditional allies, especially Europeans, whom Washington demands greater military and strategic commitment from.
The recent refusal of several countries in the alliance to engage in operations to reopen the Strait of Hormuz—crucial for the transit of nearly 20% of the world's oil—has intensified discontent within the White House.
Trump has interpreted this stance as a lack of reciprocity in a relationship that, he insists, has historically benefited Europe.
The use of a term like "paper tiger" in this context can be perceived as a tool of public pressure, aimed at highlighting what it sees as structural weaknesses within NATO and forcing a change in attitude among its members.
At the same time, it reinforces its internal narrative that the United States should not bear the burden of global security alone.
Beyond rhetoric, this approach aims at a possible redefinition of Washington's role within the Atlantic alliance.
Trump has left the door open to review the United States' participation in NATO, which could represent a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy.
Thus, the concept of "paper tiger" solidifies as a versatile tool in the president's communication strategy: it serves both to erode the image of his rivals and to strain alliances and accelerate changes on the international stage.
Filed under: