Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

EricMaundry

(1,619 posts)
Mon Jul 25, 2016, 03:47 AM Jul 2016

Trump’s Loose NATO Talk Already Has Endangered Us [View all]

Defense One:
We reached a new low this week when one of the two major presidential candidates called into question our U.S. treaty obligation to NATO. Donald Trump’s remarks in a New York Times interview that he would only defend the Baltic states against a Russian invasion if they “have fulfilled their obligations to us” leaves open the question of whether under a President Trump the United States would honor its Article V commitment to treat an attack against one NATO member as an attack against all. Our obligation, and that of the Baltic states, is to come to the assistance of any NATO ally, without conditions.

Trump told the Times he had a condition – that the United States would be “reimbursed.” This “obligation” he refers to is the relatively recent agreement among NATO members that they would each spend at least 2 percent of their GDP on defense. The United States has long sought to persuade our allies to pick up more of the cost of modernizing, deploying, and fighting. But the 2 percent is a political target. Currently, only 5 of 28 NATO members meet the target and, indeed, the next president will have to work harder to convince European capitals to increase defense spending. Success, however, is more likely through diplomacy, and not bullying. And it is more likely to fail if the U.S. government questions the foundation of NATO: the Article V commitment of the 1949 Washington Treaty. Collective security works only when all countries believe everyone is committed to the common defense. And paying 2 percent of GDP to NATO is not a treaty obligation; defending each other is.

Trump’s statements run counter to international law and commitments, counter to the very status quo that helps America prosper and keeps us safe. It questions the foundation of our only operational collective security alliance, an institution that has served us well in many ways, starting from keeping the peace in the aftermath of World War II and through the Cold War. This was no small feat. We deterred the Soviet Union with conventional and nuclear NATO forces until under Gorbachev the USSR changed its approach to the West and ultimately ceased to exist.

http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016/07/trumps-loose-nato-talk-has-already-endangered-us/130162/?oref=site-defenseone-flyin-sailthru

Defense One also published the following article recently.

How Putin Weaponized Wikileaks to Influence the Election of an American President

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2016/07/how-putin-weaponized-wikileaks-influence-election-american-president/130163/
22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Is the USSR planning to invade somewhere? NATO has outlived its purpose Press Virginia Jul 2016 #1
There is no USSR. eShirl Jul 2016 #2
They know this... tallahasseedem Jul 2016 #16
I didn't realize it was the 1980's again Press Virginia Jul 2016 #20
You think? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #21
How Putin could invade the Baltic States in 6 easy steps. auntpurl Jul 2016 #3
The UK referendum that reverberated around the world... Ghost Dog Jul 2016 #4
Yes, this scenario is worst case. auntpurl Jul 2016 #6
But how many could be persuaded that such an alliance Ghost Dog Jul 2016 #7
I think enough people are still concerned about Russia to prevent that argument. auntpurl Jul 2016 #8
PROBLEM IS.... cynzke Jul 2016 #13
First two steps: Georgia, Ukraine. glennward Jul 2016 #11
All the more reason to vacate the alliance Press Virginia Jul 2016 #12
Wow, ok, that is nuts. auntpurl Jul 2016 #18
So you like our bloated defense budget Press Virginia Jul 2016 #19
+1 tallahasseedem Jul 2016 #17
Your opinion is not policy PJMcK Jul 2016 #5
You must keep up... pipoman Jul 2016 #15
If Trump, God forbid, became President avebury Jul 2016 #9
He really is dangerous, everything about this hypocrite is based on money, everything, and his turbinetree Jul 2016 #10
My issue with NATO, UN, and some other world organizations pipoman Jul 2016 #14
Politifact: For 2016, NATO’s total military budget is about $2 billion. The US pays 22%, Germany 15% pampango Jul 2016 #22
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Trump’s Loose NATO Talk A...»Reply #0