Posted on 03/06/2025 8:25:56 AM PST by bitt
President Trump is considering a significant change to U.S. participation in NATO, according to three current and former senior U.S. officials and one congressional official.
Trump has discussed with aides the possibility of adjusting America’s NATO engagement to favor members that allocate a set percentage of their GDP to defense, the officials said.
As part of this potential shift, the U.S. might not come to the defense of a NATO ally under attack if the country fails to meet the defense spending threshold, the officials said. Such a move would mark a major departure from NATO’s Article 5, which states that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all.
Trump is also considering prioritizing military exercises with NATO countries that meet the spending benchmark, the officials said. His administration has already signaled that the U.S. could scale back its military presence in Europe, with one option under review involving repositioning troops to focus on or around nations that meet the defense spending requirement.
The potential shift in U.S. NATO policy comes as Trump urges European allies to take on a greater role in aiding Ukraine and in ensuring stability if a peace agreement is reached.
link to ABC
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/trump-considering-major-nato-policy-shift-rcna195089
p
Not a bad idea at all.
Although I’d prefer pulling out of NATO completely.
L
NATO needs to give each member a support level card which signifies the level of defense they receive from NATO when the fit hits the shan. Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze, Tin and Aluminum.
The only larger country in Europe serious about defense is Poland, understandable given its history and past conquests by Germany, Austria, and Russia/USSR. Russia under Putin may not be an immediate threat and is a relative moderate but he won’t last forever and his successor may want to restore the empires of the Tsars and Stalin.
We need to shift our priority to the Pacific and our navy. Europe is committing suicide with their immigration policies. In another generation it will be Eurabia and not worth a bucket of goat snot so why put the money into countries who are hell bent on national suicide.
I agree, we need to tell the Europeans we are done with NATO. We will sell them certain weapons but no troops or US funds for NATO. This post WWII foreign policy paradigm has ran it’s course, time for a 4th Turning.
Fixed it for you.
Same here.
Sounds reasonable to me. Long overdue really.
One request please. Look for a way to monitor that Defense $ spent doesn't fund woke.
So he will limit basing and exercises to those that meet spending thresholds, good idea. none of them do.
One issue I have with Europe building up amies though is that they are explicitly doing that as a counterbalance to the USA ... us ... and we are giving them the tech and weapons to do it. Why do we have an alliance with, and provide weapons to a group of nations that seem to think we're the baddies?
Europe is like Haiti. It can’t take care of its own affairs. Think defense. Our military support pays for on month vacations.
Ukraine-Conscription-25 year-olds? Come on.
“ NATO needs to give each member a support level card which signifies the level”
Would they earn rewards points with this system ?
Treaties are treaties, and under U.S. law Treaties are only seond to the Constitution in terms of their legal standing.
If Trump wants to amend the U.S. terms of acceptance of a treaty, he will need the Senate to approve the new terms, and an act of Congress to withdraw from treaty altogether. The U.S. approved NATO treaty does not have any provision for parcelling out to whom any aspects of the treaty can be left out.
Gotta pay to play...
We should lease the EU a part of our land/air forces and also assess a freedom of the seas annual for our navy.
We could also sell them “insurance” for “full protection.”
“That’s a nice little country/continent you got there. Be a shame if something bad were to happen to it.
Under the treaty...we are only obligated to “consult” if a member is attacked.
Consult, not defend.
So answer the phone and say.....”Fight back.”
I’d also send a link to my “Uncle Sam” cash carry Army-Navy store.
NATO Treaty Article 5:
Article 5
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”
The deal could be simple. Any money you save by underfunding your military goes to Uncle Sam as an insurance premium.
We should be the backstop, and not the lead dog.
Besides, I have a feeling we’re going to have to deal with matters in our own hemisphere.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.