Trump is not the first US president to deplore NATO's spending

World



[ad_1]

He adopts only arguments and expresses frustrations expressed by his two most recent predecessors, albeit in a much less subtle, non-diplomatic and trumpian manner.

The current president is particularly sensitive to the cost of US security for his allies in both Asia and Europe, and sees much of the alliances that underlie US global power in transactional rather than geopolitical terms.
Complaints about NATO spending animated his 2016 campaign, when he called the alliance "obsolete". Europe, where years of complacency have become established after the fall of the Soviet Union, can say that they have not been warned.
"It costs us too much money and frankly they have to put more money … we pay disproportionately," Trump said at a CNN meeting in March 2016. At an acrimonious meeting of NATO leaders last year, he said that Europe was not "fair" to US taxpayers. Disastrous G7 summit last month, Trump criticized NATO as being "worse than NAFTA", as reported by Axios.

But before what loomed as a crushing NATO summit in Brussels next week, Trump's anger, expressed in letters sent by the administration to several foreign governments, raises fears that his uncompromising approach will turn against him and not jeopardizes the alliance itself.

His frustration also seems rooted in more fundamental hostility. and the multilateral cooperation that united the US-led community of democracies after the Second World War.

After all, Trump has traditionally withdrawn from multilateral arrangements, such as the Paris Climate Agreement and the Trans-Pacific Partnership. is also a ransom against the World Trade Organization. He says that America's main allies are only interested in attacking his "piggy bank".
Trump asks NATO to spend more or cope with the changes in the US military

"The situation in Ukraine reminds us that our freedom We are not free and we must be willing to pay for the assets, the personnel, the training necessary to ensure we have a force of Credible NATO and a strength of effective emancipation. "

Six years ago, at his At the last NATO summit, President George W. Bush had called on NATO members to" increase their investments in defense for support the operations of NATO and the EU ". when we deploy together. "[19659018] Even without Trump, it was inevitable that Americans would begin to question their overseas commitments and the cost-benefit ratio of alliances like NATO while the memories of the day were not the same. Horror of the Second World War erase and the common goal of the Cold War.] But there have been positive signs in recent years, which may be overshadowed by Trump's anger against his American allies: Many diplomats fear that Brussels will repeat the G7 summit in Canada, which Trump has feared Western cohesion
The latest NATO figures, from 2017 , indicate a 4.3% increase in defense spending as a percentage of GDP among European Alliance members and Canada Military spending is on the rise for most members – partly because of pressure American and renewed fears of ex Russian pansion after the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

Yet at the time of publication of the report a year ago only spend 2% of GDP on defense, a goal that all nations have reached until In 2024.

However, the US complaints exceed the single figure.

The capacity of NATO's armed forces is of great concern: the impact of the Great Recession and the fiscal pressures on countries that provide more generous welfare states than the United States have some European powers to make painful decisions. Britain, for example, has two new large aircraft carriers that will become fully operational in the coming years and renews its independent nuclear deterrent Trident.

Yet, earlier this year, the British Army Chief, General Sir Nicholas Carter, warned after years of defense cuts that Britain's ability to engage Russian forces tested in Syria and Ukraine could be eroded if efforts are not made to match their capabilities.
NATO counts, and the fact that Trump made it a danger is dangerous

"We must recognize that credible deterrence must be supported by authentic capabilities and genuine commitment that deserve the respect of potential opponents," Carter said.

Some US officials use what they see as a drag on the part of NATO members. Trump criticizes the president for trying to undermine the transatlantic alliance – including by his caring relationship with Putin.

"If you think Russia is a threat, ask yourself this question: why does Germany spend less than 1.2% PNG?" Trump National Security Advisor, John Bolton, said on his website "Face the Nation" this weekend.

Complaints that the administration is not attached to NATO are also reduced by 3.4 billion dollars in 2017 for the European deterrence initiative. came out of a program of the Obama era to reassure US partners after the entry of Russia into Ukraine <h3> Germany delays spending </h3> </p> <div class= L & # 39; Germany has committed to increasing defense spending to only 1.5% of its GDP. 2025, despite a series of reports questioning the readiness of his forces. Defense spending has traditionally been a sensitive political issue in a nation that has spent decades accepting its militaristic past.

In a letter to Merkel, read to Michelle Kosinski of CNN by a source, Trump said he understood the political constraints "The United States continues to devote more resources to the defense of Europe, where the economies of the continent, including Germany, are doing well and where security challenges abound, "writes Trump

. a thinly veiled threat that the United States will begin to question its own dedication to European defense if Europe does not do much more.

"It will become increasingly difficult to justify to US citizens why some countries do not share the burden of security while American soldiers continue to sacrifice their lives abroad or to return home seriously. "

Such arguments are wavering among NATO members, as the only one in the world. Chapter 5 on collective defense has always been invoked to support the United States after the attacks of September 11, 2001. Nations like Great Britain and Canada have suffered heavy losses fighting alongside the United States in Afghanistan. According to the website iCasualties.org, Germany has lost 54 soldiers in the Afghan war. Although Trump is furious about NATO spending, alliance partners and NATO supporters in the United States are just as concerned about the fact that he does not care about NATO spending. This same gap was underscored by the resignation this week of the US ambassador to Estonia, James Melville Jr. In a Facebook post obtained by Foreign Policy magazine, Melville wrote:

"For the President to say that the EU was "set up to take advantage of the US, attack our piggy bank", or that "NATO is as bad as NAFTA" is not factually only "[19659006] The transatlantic disconnect encapsulated in this post is why the NATO summit next week could be the most crucial in the history of the alliance.

Ryan Ryan Browne and Elise Labott contribute ed to this report.

[ad_2]
Source link

Tags

Powered by https://naaju.com/poland | Designed by Naaju
© Copyright 2024, All Rights Reserved