Leader of the free world
S
hare the NATO burden: It’s a fine sticker to slap on the bumper of a big American car, and a fine message for President Trump to carry to a summit of alliance heads of state Thursday. Except Trump’s nudging of the United States’ partners, which echoed that of previous Presidents, verged on haranguing — especially worrisome haranguing in light of glaring omissions in the President’s remarks.
The biggest among them: A President who called the world’s foremost planet-stabilizing military alliance “obsolete” during his campaign, who said he would rush to allies’ defense “if they fulfill their obligations to us,” conveniently failed as U.S. commander-in-chief to commit to NATO’s central plank, the mutual defense pledge known as Article 5.
It declares that an attack on one is an attack on all, and it has been invoked exactly once in history: after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, when allies rushed to America’s side by fighting against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
If a U.S. President sends signal after signal that an alliance has outlived its usefulness, and that he may not believe in its foundation, how can he credibly lead partners to strengthen it?
Meantime, Trump failed to acknowledge the substantial progress made by NATO allies in recent years, falsely claiming that they owe “massive amounts” from past years. (That’s just not how it works.)
It is true that America, the world’s lone superpower and an unparalleled check on global aggression, shoulders a disproportionate share of global defense, spending a higher percentage of its GDP on its military (some 3.6%) than its counterparts do.
But it is not as though we lost a round of eenie, meenie, miney, mo. The American people, aware of the nation’s exceptional place in the world, have over the decades elected representatives and Presidents who have set defense spending at current levels. It has been our conscious decision as a democracy.
Case in point: Trump, who complains about the size of government, has pushed for a massive military buildup.
NATO allies, among them France, the U.K., Canada, Italy and Germany, are, likewise, democracies responsive to their own people and parliaments. Unlike, say, the Saudis, leaders cannot snap their fingers and pay up.
Yes, America’s partners have pledged to hike defense spending to at least 2% of GDP by 2024 — and are slowly on the way. Nearly two dozen NATO nations upped their defense spending allocations last year, five this year hit the 2% target, and eight are set to hit it next year.
Trump expressed no gratitude for progress made, only demands for more cash, seemingly as a condition of honoring the pact.
Which brings us to the final omission: The role of Russia and its leader Vladimir Putin, who wants nothing more than to weaken the ties that bind NATO and reassert his country’s dominance in Asia and Eastern Europe. Russia, which has already annexed Crimea, breathes daily down necks in Ukraine and Georgia.
Though Trump has so far kept U.S. sanctions against the Kremlin in place, his words repeatedly suggest he is unconcerned with providing a check on the Russian expansionism that rightly scares the hell out of Europe.
Nobody wants or needs the rattling of sabers. But a stiffer spine is long overdue.