I got a kick this afternoon reading a serious column expressing the concern of yet another "expert" that Donald Trump has "already damaged" NATO. The expert in question is Richard Haass, a long time American diplomat. According to Haass, Trump has done damage because he has said things that have previously been left unsaid, and that worries our allies. Trump, after all, has said that the other members of NATO besides the USA have to honor their treaty obligations, both financial and military. Oh, the horror. Even worse than calling on the other members of NATO to honor their commitments, Trump has said that if the other nations won't meet their obligations, that maybe the USA should pull out of the organization.
Think about that. Here we have an "expert" who thinks that it is wrong to call upon our allies to do what they promised to do. No rational person could ever think that Trump's statements damaged NATO. After all, what does the USA get from NATO if the other nations do not meet their obligations? We made commitments which we have honored. If other nations want to be freeloaders, it is not our destiny to protect them. These other countries have to protect themselves.
Hopefully, the idea that the USA might pull out of NATO under Trump will frighten other NATO members. That concern should push these other countries into doing all the things that they promised.
At the debate the other night, Hillary Clinton said that NATO forces had made a major contribution to the fight against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan after 9-11. Here's a list of the contributions of troops of a some of the NATO members according to NATO itself:
Country Number of soldiers
Luxembourg 1
Spain 7
Slovenia 7
Estonia 5
Belgium 40
Netherlands 82
Norway 36
Finland 36
Iceland 2
Greece 4
There are more countries. Suffice to say, however, that aside from the UK, not a single NATO member contributed a significant number of troops. The help to the over 100,000 US troops involved was just symbolic.
NATO is supposed to be an alliance that benefits ALL members including even the United States of America. The dinosaurs of diplomacy may be horrified to think that obligations of other countries matter. Still, the president of the United States is supposed to look out for the interests of America, and that means having our allies do what they promise to do.
Think about that. Here we have an "expert" who thinks that it is wrong to call upon our allies to do what they promised to do. No rational person could ever think that Trump's statements damaged NATO. After all, what does the USA get from NATO if the other nations do not meet their obligations? We made commitments which we have honored. If other nations want to be freeloaders, it is not our destiny to protect them. These other countries have to protect themselves.
Hopefully, the idea that the USA might pull out of NATO under Trump will frighten other NATO members. That concern should push these other countries into doing all the things that they promised.
At the debate the other night, Hillary Clinton said that NATO forces had made a major contribution to the fight against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan after 9-11. Here's a list of the contributions of troops of a some of the NATO members according to NATO itself:
Country Number of soldiers
Luxembourg 1
Spain 7
Slovenia 7
Estonia 5
Belgium 40
Netherlands 82
Norway 36
Finland 36
Iceland 2
Greece 4
There are more countries. Suffice to say, however, that aside from the UK, not a single NATO member contributed a significant number of troops. The help to the over 100,000 US troops involved was just symbolic.
NATO is supposed to be an alliance that benefits ALL members including even the United States of America. The dinosaurs of diplomacy may be horrified to think that obligations of other countries matter. Still, the president of the United States is supposed to look out for the interests of America, and that means having our allies do what they promise to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment