Trump’s rise raises fears for NATO

Former President Trump’s possible re-election has raised domestic concerns that he could take a closer look at transatlantic alliances, possibly withdrawing from NATO, and even reverse U.S. support for the Ukraine war. and is increasing in Europe.

Trump is almost certain to be the Republican presidential nominee, with polls showing him leading President Biden both nationally and in battleground states.

In December, Congress ruled that the president could unilaterally withdraw from NATO without approval by two-thirds of the Senate, as the United States and NATO members have invested heavily in protecting Ukraine and maintaining the alliance. passed a law prohibiting this. But this did little to calm those anxious about a second term for Mr. Trump, who blasted the organization in his first term.

“The fact that the Senate thought it necessary to include such a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is disconcerting enough,” said one European, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive issue. the diplomat said.

“Our interpretation of NATO withdrawal is that if it were tested, the president would win.”

John Bolton, who served as President Trump’s national security adviser and considers him a danger to the country, said he was “confident” that Trump would withdraw from NATO if elected. Ta.

“I think this is something he feels strongly about.” Mr. Bolton said in an interview with MSNBC last month that he believes European countries have not yet paid their fair share, and that he believes European countries are very negative. “I think they’re negotiating a trade deal with us, and I think they’re looking forward to leaving NATO.”

Ivo Daalder, who served as NATO ambassador during the Obama administration, said President Trump could take many actions that would undermine NATO’s security without formally withdrawing from the alliance, and the provisions of the NDAA prevent such actions. He said it was of little use.

“I don’t put much money into the bill,” he said.

“I think the fact that Congress overwhelmingly supports U.S. membership in NATO is an important indicator, and I think that’s welcome, but it doesn’t mean that the U.S. should not completely eliminate its involvement in NATO. It doesn’t prevent you from reducing it.”

Possible actions by President Trump or other leaders hostile to NATO or Europe Expand your reach from frustrating tasks in Brussels by instructing U.S. diplomats to miss meetings, attend and remain silent, engage in grandstanding, or vote against measures that require consensus. ing. All of this can cause the body to shut down.

The United States could refuse to participate in planning meetings or NATO military exercises, or refuse to share information with NATO allies.

Also of concern is how the United States will respond to potential calls for Article 5, a mutual defense clause that can be invoked if a NATO member is attacked. This is seen by Russian President Vladimir Putin in particular as the strongest deterrent against any aggression.

During his campaign, Trump boasted that as president he would threaten to curb the United States’ commitment to Article 5 because some member states were not meeting their financial obligations.

“And I went to them and said, ‘If you don’t pay, we’re not going to protect you.'” And they said, “What does that mean?” I said, “That’s what I mean.” President Trump said this in an interview on FOX New.s In January.

Dahlder, president of the Chicago Council on International Affairs, said President Trump could direct lawmakers to vote against invoking NATO Article 5, removing the legal obligation to comply with mutual defense agreements. Even if the U.S. votes in favor, Trump could still limit U.S. military aid, pointing to the treaty’s text that states countries can provide aid “if they deem it necessary.”

“Trump might say, I’m going to send a minesweeper, and that’s my contribution, you guys understand.”

European countries and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg have pushed back against claims that European and NATO members are not standing up for themselves, contributing enough to the alliance or supporting Ukraine.

“Since the outbreak of the war, the United States has provided about $75 billion. Other allies and partners have provided more than $100 billion,” Stoltenberg said in a speech at the Heritage Foundation late last month.

The conservative think tank in Washington is home to national security experts who served in President Trump’s first term and could fill a potential second administration.

In a panel discussion, Stoltenberg pushed back against claims by Victoria Coates, Trump’s former deputy national security adviser, that Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine shows the failure of NATO’s deterrence.

“NATO deterrence is about Article 5. And that applies to NATO allies, and it has never failed,” he said.

“Ukraine is a partner, but Ukraine is not subject to Article 5. So I don’t think we should confuse those two things, because that would actually undermine the credibility of Article 5. .”

Still, Mr. Stoltenberg’s remarks in Heritage were an attempt to sell the alliance as a “good deal” for the United States to a crowd that supports Mr. Trump’s confrontational and transactional approach to policy. Ta.

“Over the past two years, NATO allies have agreed to purchase $120 billion worth of weapons from American defense companies,” Stoltenberg said.

“American jobs depend on American sales to the European and Canadian defense markets.”

Robert Greenway, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Center for National Security, said Trump in a second term would not back down from holding a strong leadership position in NATO, but it would be “a little different. He reiterated his criticism as follows: European allies need to further increase defense spending.

“I think some countries are reconsidering their commitment to security, let alone NATO, to their own security, perhaps out of fear and anxiety about Trump’s return and possible return to the White House. . I think that’s probably a healthy thing too,” he said of his conversations with European colleagues.

“But at the end of the day, we’re telling them that we’re not envisioning a situation where a future President Trump would pull out of NATO. We just don’t see the situation. There’s no desire to do that. But I do see a strong desire to get NATO to do more.”

But European countries are angry at comments from President Trump and his allies in Congress that Europe is under-supporting NATO and Ukraine, and that the United States is shouldering the burden.

“When Republican congressmen and senators say, ‘We need to do more,’ the reality is that we can’t do more because we’re doing everything we can,” said the chairman of the Danish Parliament’s Foreign Policy Committee. Michael Astrup Jensen said. he said after a meeting on Capitol Hill this week.

According to the paper, Denmark is one of five European countries that provides Ukraine with more than 1% of its gross domestic product (GDP), while the United States provides more than 0.3%. Ukraine Aid Tracking Survey by Kiel Institute.

Jensen traveled to Washington with colleagues from Estonia, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and Sweden to lobby Congress to pass President Biden’s $60 billion request for aid to Ukraine. Most of that money was earmarked for backfilling U.S. defense production for weapons sent to Ukraine.

While all countries are NATO members, with Sweden awaiting Hungary’s ratification of NATO membership, the group issued a stark warning that Europe cannot maintain Ukraine’s defense against Russia without the United States.

They warned that if Russia could not be defeated in Ukraine, there would be war with NATO.

“We currently have Europe giving Ukraine its fair share, both in terms of weapons systems and funding, and even giving Ukraine a portion, but the gap cannot be bridged if the U.S. withdraws. ” said Ine Eriksen Søreide, head of the foreign policy committee in the Norwegian parliament.

“And it’s not about money, it’s first and foremost about military equipment.”

Asked whether he could trust the second Trump administration, or the Republican Party in general, to work with Europe, Latvia’s Foreign Policy Chairman Riharc Kols said there was no choice.

“We don’t have the privilege of choosing which U.S. president to work with.” [with]. We will work with whoever the American people choose as their next president. ”

But Corse said he was pessimistic about Washington’s commitment.

“The current discussion in Latvian society is actually moving in the direction of preparing for war,” he said.

“That should be reflected here in the United States. It’s taken very seriously.”