Shock, condemnation after Trump questions NATO commitments

[webfact]

Shock, condemnation after Trump questions NATO commitments
By MATTHEW LEE

WASHINGTON (AP) — Alarm and condemnation erupted Thursday from European capitals, the White House and leaders of Donald Trump's own party after the Republican presidential nominee suggested the United States might abandon its NATO military commitments if he were elected president.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who backed Trump at the party's national convention only two days earlier, said he totally disagreed with the statement but was willing to "chalk it up to a rookie mistake."

McConnell called NATO "the most successful military alliance in the history of the world," in a Facebook interview with The New York Times.

In Brussels, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the alliance agreement was crystal clear: "We defend each other."

"I will not interfere in the U.S. election campaign," Stoltenberg said. But he pointedly added, "Two world wars have shown that peace in Europe is also important for the security of the United States."

Secretary of State John Kerry reaffirmed the United States' commitment to NATO.

"This administration, like every single administration, Republican and Democrat alike since 1949, remains fully committed to the NATO alliance and to our security commitments under Article 5, which is absolutely bedrock to our membership and to our partnership with NATO."

Indeed, Trump's suggestion, in an interview with the Times, would upend decades of American foreign policy and rock the security structures that have underpinned European and global stability since the end of World War II.

Trump said in the Times interview that he would review allies' financial contributions — in this case, those from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania — before acting under NATO's mutual defense clause, if any of the countries were attacked by Russia.

Various U.S. administrations have complained, often bitterly, that many NATO members do not foot their share of the alliance's bills.

The U.S. accounts for more than 70 percent of all NATO defense spending and only four other allies — Britain, Estonia, Greece and Poland — meet the minimum 2 percent of gross domestic product spending on defense that NATO requires.

Sen. Bob Corker, a Trump supporter and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said that "many of us are becoming exasperated with the fact that the U.S. is playing such an outsized role in the protection of our NATO allies even though we greatly appreciate and respect the importance of the alliance itself."

But Trump's floating of the idea that the spending target would be a prerequisite for the U.S. to defend a NATO ally was an abrupt break from longstanding American policy.

Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves tweeted that his country was one of the few to meet the minimum defense expenditure and noted pointedly that Estonia "fought, with no caveats" on behalf of the U.S. in Afghanistan.

The only time the treaty's mutual defense clause has been invoked was in 2002, when NATO surveillance planes patrolled American skies and deployed a third of the troops sent to Afghanistan for a decade. More than 1,000 non-American troops died in Afghanistan.

Ilves' fellow Eastern European leaders sought to calm the furor.

"Regardless of who will be the president of America, we will trust in America," Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite told reporters in Vilnius.

Yet, people throughout Eastern Europe expressed deep concern. Fears of Russian aggression have run high since it annexed the Ukrainian region of Crimea.

"His words were irresponsible and they inspired fear in me. I'm worried about the world's future, about Poland's future," said 39-year-old schoolteacher Lidia Zagorowska in Warsaw, Poland.

"If I were a U.S. citizen, I would never, ever vote for Trump. Let that be my answer," said Katarzyna Woznicka, 54, walking her dog in downtown Warsaw.

Back in the United States, criticism, including some from Trump's fellow Republicans, was blistering.

"My hope is that if Donald is elected president, we can convince him to change his mind on it," said Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., a former primary opponent who now supports Trump.

A bitter foe within Trump's own party, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, said: "I'm 100 percent certain how Russian President (Vladimir) Putin feels - he's a very happy man."

Some Republicans opposed to Trump have indeed sought to cast him as pro-Putin, a position that would put him at odds with both Republican and Democratic foreign policy and also diverge from the current GOP party platform adopted at the convention.

Trump supporters succeeded in preventing a reference to arming Ukraine from getting into this year's platform, but the manifesto itself is demonstrably not pro-Russia. It accuses "current officials in the Kremlin" of eroding the "personal liberty and fundamental rights" of the Russian people."

"We will meet the return of Russian belligerence with the same resolve that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union," the Republican platform says. "We will not accept any territorial change in Eastern Europe imposed by force, in Ukraine, Georgia, or elsewhere, and will use all appropriate constitutional measures to bring to justice the practitioners of aggression and assassination."

___

Associated Press writers Vivian Salama in Washington; Erica Werner in Cleveland; John-Thor Dahlberg in Brussels; Liudas Dapkus in Vilnius, Lithuania; Jari Tanner in Tallinn, Estonia; Matti Huuhtanen in Helsinki; and Monika Scislowska in Warsaw contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2016-07-22

[Boon Mee]

What's the fuss?

Y'all want the USA to pull your chestnuts out of the fire again?

[Carib]

What's the fuss?

Y'all want the USA to pull your chestnuts out of the fire again?

No, we would like to see real chestnuts if the US says they are there.

[Caps]

Not a problem, just take every single Military person from European soil when you go.........including all the early warning stuff

Not much good anyway...apart from causing problems

Edited July 22, 2016 by Caps

[DeaconJohn]

Does Trump have a death-wish?

Challenging the interests of the Military-Industrial Complex can be hazardous to your health.

JFK found that out the hard way.

[Cory1848]

What's the fuss?

Y'all want the USA to pull your chestnuts out of the fire again?

It's called a treaty alliance. If the US were to renege on a treaty commitment, the country would lose its credibility around the world for a few generations. Plus, it would be the wrong thing to do. Trump is worse than a "rookie"; he's a blithering idiot.

[Cory1848]

Does Trump have a death-wish?

Challenging the interests of the Military-Industrial Complex can be hazardous to your health.

JFK found that out the hard way.

I'm not much for conspiracy theories, but I would never stake my life on the single-shooter argument regarding JFK! As for Trump, I'd be more concerned what a consortium of Big Agriculture might do were a President Trump to seriously move to deport 15 million Mexican workers. He would last about five nanoseconds ...

[spacebass]

Well if he's elected 'Democracy' wins trumps all in U.S. rhetoric.

[Alive]

The UK's got nukes. Trump's right about cutting back. At least, he should get Europe to pay for troops stationed in Europe. Military waste is absolutely America's biggest problem. Less military on foreign soil. Go Trump!

[Bung]

Hang on, the Senate Republican leader says it's just a "rookie mistake"? Oh, Ok! That's great. The potential next president of the USA makes rookie mistakes. What other ones with potentially grave consequences will he make?

[mesterm]

All the elites are disgusted by Trump but the common people seem to support his sentiment. Maybe because they are the ones actually living in reality and not some liberal wet dream.

[ClutchClark]

Isn't Trump saying that if other countries, named specifically as Latvia, Estonia & Lithuania, don't pay the bill they agreed to then we may no linger provide services?

What part of that is unreasonable?

The article also states this non-payment of membership dues to NATO has been a long-standing issue.

Russia is the neighbor of Eastern European countries who rely on NATO for protection. When the monthly bill arrives in the mail I would think it is the one to be paid first.

Edited July 22, 2016 by ClutchClark

[Emster23]

If Trump is elected it will give good benchmark date for some not so distant future Chinese historian writing "Decline and Fall of the American Empire"

[ClutchClark]

If Trump is elected it will give good benchmark date for some not so distant future Chinese historian writing "Decline and Fall of the American Empire"

That timeline already started under Clinton's NAFTA and was accelerated under GWB and then most recently by Obama.

Trump is far from Number One on that list.

[Cory1848]

Isn't Trump saying that if other countries, named specifically as Latvia, Estonia & Lithuania, don't pay the bill they agreed to then we may no linger provide services?

What part of that is unreasonable?

The article also states this non-payment of membership dues to NATO has been a long-standing issue.

Russia is the neighbor of Eastern European countries who rely on NATO for protection. When the monthly bill arrives in the mail I would think it is the one to be paid first.

1. A treaty is not a matter of providing services for payment. If a treaty ally is threatened, demanding payment before acting to counter that threat is essentially blackmail. A treaty is an obligation, pure and simple.

2. Estonia and Poland both meet their NATO obligations in full by spending 2 percent of their GDP on defense. Latvia is ramping up defense spending and is committed to reaching 2 percent by 2018. Lithuania, while also ramping up defense spending, is admittedly behind and has committed to reaching 1.5 percent of GDP by 2018.

3. I don’t believe that Trump is aware of these facts; for Trump, even these simple statements are already TMI. In fact, I don’t think that Trump could point out the Baltic states on a map.

[Chicog]

If Trump is elected it will give good benchmark date for some not so distant future Chinese historian writing "Decline and Fall of the American Empire"

That timeline already started under Clinton's NAFTA and was accelerated under GWB and then most recently by Obama.

Trump is far from Number One on that list.

"Clinton's NAFTA"......

Bush signs North American trade pact Clinton says he won't renegotiate

December 18, 1992|By Gilbert A. Lewthwaite | Gilbert A. Lewthwaite,Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- President Bush signed the North American Free Trade Agreement yesterday, and his successor-in-waiting Bill Clinton immediately announced that he would not seek the treaty's renegotiation.

[Usernames]

All the Euros on this forum who constantly complain about the US military and its "empire" with military camps across Europe should be HAPPY to hear this news. So, why all the outrage? I think this is great. Why should the US go to nuclear war over the Baltic states?

[ClutchClark]

If Trump is elected it will give good benchmark date for some not so distant future Chinese historian writing "Decline and Fall of the American Empire"

That timeline already started under Clinton's NAFTA and was accelerated under GWB and then most recently by Obama.

Trump is far from Number One on that list.

"Clinton's NAFTA"......

Bush signs North American trade pact Clinton says he won't renegotiate

December 18, 1992|By Gilbert A. Lewthwaite | Gilbert A. Lewthwaite,Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- President Bush signed the North American Free Trade Agreement yesterday, and his successor-in-waiting Bill Clinton immediately announced that he would not seek the treaty's renegotiation.

It happened on Clinton's Watch and Clinton grabbed the credit at the time...but I figured you would be the one to call me on it.

So the Fall of the US started under #41...that sure does not get Slick Willy off the hook.

[ClutchClark]

Isn't Trump saying that if other countries, named specifically as Latvia, Estonia & Lithuania, don't pay the bill they agreed to then we may no linger provide services?

What part of that is unreasonable?

The article also states this non-payment of membership dues to NATO has been a long-standing issue.

Russia is the neighbor of Eastern European countries who rely on NATO for protection. When the monthly bill arrives in the mail I would think it is the one to be paid first.

1. A treaty is not a matter of providing services for payment. If a treaty ally is threatened, demanding payment before acting to counter that threat is essentially blackmail. A treaty is an obligation, pure and simple.

2. Estonia and Poland both meet their NATO obligations in full by spending 2 percent of their GDP on defense. Latvia is ramping up defense spending and is committed to reaching 2 percent by 2018. Lithuania, while also ramping up defense spending, is admittedly behind and has committed to reaching 1.5 percent of GDP by 2018.

3. I dont believe that Trump is aware of these facts; for Trump, even these simple statements are already TMI. In fact, I dont think that Trump could point out the Baltic states on a map.

Its called "Pay to Play"...the only reality where the concept does not exist is under the Bernie Sanders/Obama Utopia of Free everything.

[worgeordie]

Just watching him speak at the Convention,reminds one of the Nuremberg

rallies,same sort of rhetoric,but I must say his facial expressions reminds

me more of Mussolini,

The wife's saying turn him off he's giving me a headache.says it all I think.

regards worgeordie

[yardrunner]

What's the fuss?

Y'all want the USA to pull your chestnuts out of the fire again?

What like it did in Vietnam, and like it did in two World Wars when it came late to the party after other countries had been bled dry.

Sounds more like Trump is getting ready to invade Mexico and Canada

[yardrunner]

All the elites are disgusted by Trump but the common people seem to support his sentiment. Maybe because they are the ones actually living in reality and not some liberal wet dream.

No they are the same kind of people who you can see on old newsreels of the Nuremberg rallies and look how that ended up

[Usernames]

All the elites are disgusted by Trump but the common people seem to support his sentiment. Maybe because they are the ones actually living in reality and not some liberal wet dream.

No they are the same kind of people who you can see on old newsreels of the Nuremberg rallies and look how that ended up

So Trump is Hitler because he does NOT want to go to war with Russia and continue to expand nato's lebensraum in eastern Europe.

[rethaier]

What's the fuss?

Y'all want the USA to pull your chestnuts out of the fire again?

It's called a treaty alliance. If the US were to renege on a treaty commitment, the country would lose its credibility around the world for a few generations. Plus, it would be the wrong thing to do. Trump is worse than a "rookie"; he's a blithering idiot.

The USA deservedly lost its credibility in many areas years ago. Get over it the USA is not the worlds policemen and they don't intend to be, it is only a facade. The USA's only interest in the ME is oil, it has nothing to do with humanity or preserving countries. Where there is no oil they are interested only in creating puppets like Germany and France or undermining Russia.

[oxo1947]

1. A treaty is not a matter of providing services for payment. If a treaty ally is threatened, demanding payment before acting to counter that threat is essentially blackmail. A treaty is an obligation, pure and simple.

2. Estonia and Poland both meet their NATO obligations in full by spending 2 percent of their GDP on defense. Latvia is ramping up defense spending and is committed to reaching 2 percent by 2018. Lithuania, while also ramping up defense spending, is admittedly behind and has committed to reaching 1.5 percent of GDP by 2018.

3. I don’t believe that Trump is aware of these facts; for Trump, even these simple statements are already TMI. In fact, I don’t think that Trump could point out the Baltic states on a map.

Your correct Cory---those countries you mentioned are paying the full amount----the countries that are not are Britain---France etc, In fact Britain was down to paying under 1% last time.

[Chicog]

It happened on Clinton's Watch and Clinton grabbed the credit at the time...but I figured you would be the one to call me on it.

It did not "happen on Clinton's Watch".

The Bush administration negotiated it and Bush signed it.

This is unambiguous.

Please try and be clear and unequivocal in your remarks, then you won't need to be corrected.

[ClutchClark]

Just watching him speak at the Convention,reminds one of the Nuremberg

rallies,same sort of rhetoric,but I must say his facial expressions reminds

me more of Mussolini,

The wife's saying turn him off he's giving me a headache.says it all I think.

regards worgeordie

I heard the same analogy when Obama won...

As for headaches, Palin & GWB were tied for the worst for me but Hillary & Obama take a close second. I would place Trump in the Show position myself.

But I will never tire of his wife ;-)

[TEFLKrabi]

1. A treaty is not a matter of providing services for payment. If a treaty ally is threatened, demanding payment before acting to counter that threat is essentially blackmail. A treaty is an obligation, pure and simple.

2. Estonia and Poland both meet their NATO obligations in full by spending 2 percent of their GDP on defense. Latvia is ramping up defense spending and is committed to reaching 2 percent by 2018. Lithuania, while also ramping up defense spending, is admittedly behind and has committed to reaching 1.5 percent of GDP by 2018.

3. I don’t believe that Trump is aware of these facts; for Trump, even these simple statements are already TMI. In fact, I don’t think that Trump could point out the Baltic states on a map.

Your correct Cory---those countries you mentioned are paying the full amount----the countries that are not are Britain---France etc, In fact Britain was down to paying under 1% last time.

It says in the article that the UK is one of those paying their way. I'd be chasing Germany, France, Spain, Italy for more contributions.

[Junkyarddog]

After 67 years of America defending Europe its time Europe defended Europe.We are broke. Time to pack and go home.

[tomwct]

Why should America pay between 75-96% of the costs of NATO over the past 20 years? I think 25% should be more like it, so Trump, the businessman wants each NATO country to pay a fair share, that includes Germany, who spply the cooks, France who supplies the flags, ect! Sounds good to me! Comrade Merkel ants to setup an EU ARMY, which sounds good, but without the Brits & the US, whoes going to do the fighting? Comrade Merkel said Germany will be the cooks in the new Army, but whoes going to do the fighting?