At the upcoming NATO summit, President Trump is likely to expose the gap between rhetoric and actual defense spending by European nations. The Europeans claim to care about Ukraine and are eager to see American money pour into a European war, but some of them still refuse to increase their own spending.

Some NATO leaders are more concerned with their personal enmity toward President Trump than with the murderous intent of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Nowhere is this more evident than in the Czech Republic, where a constitutional battle over the NATO summit just played out with an ironic twist.

For years, Czech President Petr Pavel didn’t merely disagree with President Trump. He attacked him personally. He did not limit himself to policy disagreements. He made deeply personal judgments about the president. He called Trump “a truly repulsive human being.” He said he didn’t even want to shake Trump’s hand. He added that he hoped he would “never even have the opportunity to meet him.”

Fast-forward to today, and Pavel is fighting bitterly for that very opportunity.

Newly elected Prime Minister Andrej Babiš wanted to lead the Czech delegation to the NATO summit. He has publicly supported Trump’s policies; he is willing to increase defense spending, and as head of government, he saw it as his role. President Pavel took the matter to the Constitutional Court, however, claiming that the role belonged to him as head of state. The Court agreed with Pavel, and he is leading the delegation.

Legally, the case is over. Politically, however, the optics are extraordinary. The obvious question is why a man would fight so hard to attend a summit centered on a president he once described as “a truly repulsive human being?” The contradiction is difficult to ignore.

It becomes even more remarkable when viewed through the issue that has defined Trump’s relationship with NATO from the very beginning: defense spending. For nearly a decade, Trump has delivered the same message to America’s European allies: Meet your commitments. Stop expecting American taxpayers to shoulder a disproportionate share of Europe’s defense.

Many European leaders dismissed him as crude, confrontational, or worse. Yet history has proven Trump to be correct. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine accelerated increases in European defense spending, and today even governments that once criticized Trump’s approach openly acknowledge the need for greater military investment.

That brings us back to Petr Pavel. He claims to be a strong advocate of NATO solidarity and collective defense. But during his own presidency, the Czech government led by Petr Fiala — a government Pavel consistently supported on foreign and security policy — failed to bring Czechia to NATO’s 2 percent defense-spending benchmark. They never made it higher than 1.9 percent of GDP, and that includes soft expenses like uniforms and meal catering! Czechia now arrives at another NATO summit, explaining why it has fallen short on the very burden-sharing issue Trump has championed for years.

This makes Pavel’s moral criticism of Trump ring hollow. It is difficult to lecture others about alliance responsibilities while representing a country that refuses to fulfill them. And it is difficult to portray Trump as irresponsible when his central argument — that European allies need to spend more on their own defense — has increasingly become the consensus position within NATO itself.

This is where the contrast with Andrej Babiš becomes politically significant. Babiš has cultivated a constructive relationship with Trump and has broadly supported Trump’s emphasis on national sovereignty and stronger European defense capabilities. If the purpose of the summit is to preserve and strengthen the transatlantic relationship with a Trump administration while explaining Czechia’s defense posture, Babiš was the more natural political messenger.

Instead, the Czech Republic will be represented by a president who once publicly declared that he hoped never to shake Trump’s hand. Of course, diplomacy requires working with people one dislikes. But diplomacy also rewards credibility and consistency.

Pavel spent years condemning Trump’s character while benefiting from the very security architecture Trump demanded Europe help finance. Now he finds himself fighting all the way to the Constitutional Court for the privilege of meeting the man he once dismissed with open contempt.

President Trump should call out Czechia’s low level of defense spending, making an example of their lack of commitment. It will be poetic justice that President Pavel is the one who receives the brunt of the message.