Do people get prizes or money for superficiality discussing global strategy these days? It looks like it. This is not the Cold War, and a few jingles won't solve major strategic issues. America is also the world's biggest target, and Americans should remember that. These are very dangerous times, and the global situation is very complex.
This simplistic approach is very like isolationism, which led to Pearl Harbor, 400,000 plus American dead, and a truly ridiculous image of any possible future war. The only benefit of a NATO split would be for NATO, to reduce the amount of time spent listening to this drivel. The damage can be repaired when someone with ideas born after 1940 comes back in to office in the US.
10
Most NATO members do not spend as much, on their military, as a percentage of GDP, as does the US. But for most members, their NATO commitments are the bulk of their military engagements. The US spends so much because it has it’s fingers in so many pies. Most of the military activities that the US is engaged in have little to do with NATO. If you could isolate American expenses as they relate to NATO, that sum as a percentage or GDP would not exceed other members. To conflate lower spending with a lack of commitment is insulting. Remember that the only member nation to invoke NATO solidarity is the US in Afghanistan and that everyone answered “here “.
10
Some people think Trump's approach is "working" - because our European allies are spending more on defense. Wonderful! Trump's supporters seem to think that forcing our allies to spend more on their own defense because they can't count on us to hold to our promises is somehow "winning". I guess if nobody can count on you enough to trust you to live up to your promises and treaties, and they therefore have to 'go it alone' more, that's right in line with Trump's "every man for himself" and "grab all I can" (sorry ladies...) philosophy. It sure seems like more of the things Trump does, and says, support Russia's interests than support the United States and our allies. Curious, that.
12
Mr President: You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency.
13
As repugnant as Trump is to me, this article completely fails to examine the validity of his claim, instead relying on several peremptory dismissals. On the face of it, Trump appears right; if he’s wrong, it is the author’s responsibility to lay out the counter-argument.
14
I'm all for pulling our troops and military equipments out of NATO countries. We need to pull out of Iraq, Syria, Africa, Philippines.
7
Donald Trump - pay us all the income taxes you owe - or else.
14
Just read in WP American delegation are going to Russia to “seek better relations”. So it’s official Russia is our new friend! No problems with the invasion of the Ukraine or interference with our elections. Whose on board with this?
11
Pull out of the Paris Accord, pull out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, pull out of the Iran Nuclear Accord, pull out of NAFTA, pull out of the WTO, pull out of NATO, pull out of Obamacare, pull out of Roe v. Wade, and maybe it is time for Americans who stand up for decency and honour and common sense to pull out of the "United" States.
12
Commenters are quite correct. Putin intends to re-establish domination of the old Soviet states, to recreate what a poet once termed in a phrase I have never forgotten: "This prison-house of nations."
Trump is Putin's puppet, as a wise lady once said.
7
What a unique diplomat this guy is: threaten your allies and praise to the sky your worst enemies (Xi JinPing, Kim Jong Il and Putin).
Trump first, the USA last!
7
The 2% GDP is a target, not an ironclad commitment. Trump is either too ignorant to really that or too much of a Russian puppet to accept that.
3
Let him threaten .
He is so weak on this ...
2
Let’s show them. Spend less on our military, and particularly on NATO.
1
Assuming we can outlast this doofus of a leader, a hiatus from the world might bring some sense back to this country. But since Trump just gives the tax money we save to himself and his rapacious friends, the US isn't going to benefit from his bullying other countries to prove he, Trump, is the alpha male of the world. He sounds like Wendy Whiner most always, then he lies and brags like the craven child he is. Who's impressed with that stuff other than his beloved "Base? But surviving him is a challenge with Republicans controlling government.
10
Trump continues to display his complete ignorance of history.
In his mind, NATO boils down to a dollars and cents issue no different that the fees to his ridiculous, elitist golf clubs.
What he doesn't understand, nor do any in his administration, or Republicans in either of the Houses, is the unspoken sub text of the purpose of the NATO treaty and why the US should be willing to accept the full financial burden of the costs, if need be.
Why would anyone want to see European nations build up their own armed forces? Is our memory that short sighted that we fail to remember what happened the last time Germany had a sizable army, or Japan for that matter?
The governments that currently sit in power in Europe can easily be replaced by extremist governments that may view their armies as tools of aggression rather than defense. The rise of extreme right wing parties in several countries should give us pause. It is in our best interest and the interest of the rest of the world to prevent an arms race fueled by the fear that we are abandoning our allies. And for what, money?
The only country that will benefit from the collapse of NATO is, wait for it... Russia. No surprise there.Trump continues to play Putin's hand and is convincing other Republicans to play along.
The actions of this president and his supporters towards our allies is pure and simple treason.
The definition of treason: giving aid and comfort to the enemy. If this isn't treason, what is?
8
Trump believes history began when he became president. The Obama admin had a deal with the rest of NATO members for them to increase their military contributions. They have been following that agreement.
Of course Trump won't acknowledge that that agreement exists because of his pathological need to play the victim and by extension make America play the victim.
The ridiculous aspect of Trump's argument is that the US spends many times more on its military than any country does. Europe isn't taking advantage of the US, the gov't is just mad for arms. The allocation to NATO is an accounting allocation.
American businesses love military spending and much of NATO contracts from all countries go to US companies.
The bottom line - Trump is bad for business.
7
"“It will, however, become increasingly difficult to justify to American citizens why some countries do not share NATO’s collective security burden while American soldiers continue to sacrifice their lives overseas or come home gravely wounded,” Mr. Trump wrote to Ms. Merkel."
Complete nonsense.
No American soldiers are sacrificing their lives or being wounded fighting for NATO.
Not that such an obvious truth will matter to Trump supporters.
9
It may still be corrupt because it is isolated and not subject to the same external economic forces that prevail in the more advanced countries but being integrated with the rest of the world would cause Russia to adapt to a more competitive environment where the oligarchs would be at a disadvantage. It’s a long arc, but change will eventually come. Trump sees it happening and is preparing for us to capitalize on it. When it happens you’ll see all the practical minded European countries piling in. It has nothing to do with freedom or democracy concern for which will fly out the window when Russia becomes too big a prize to ignore.
1
I think we do spend more than 2% here in Canada. You can have a look at our books but they're currently under audit. But as soon as the audit is done you'll see that we do. Until then, you'll just have to take our word for it. Right?
10
Canada is way under 2%, Air Force and Navy procurement are a joke at the moment and greatly underpunching. But Canada should fix its military on its own, not because Trump demands it.
3
LOL good one
6
I'm almost ashamed to say it, but Trump has a point here. NATO has a target of 2% of GDP, members should contribute 2% of GDP and not be free-riders. If you don't want to contribute your fair share, withdraw from the alliance.
3
I think he is going back to this argument again because he gave the military a big budget(for the optics) now he cannot float that and his other spending initiatives. So, to try to save some spend on the military, lets get the others to float the cost. This way he looks like he is getting the other players to chip in more at the same time cut back on military spending while not looking like he is cutting back on military spending and providing some room in his budget for other things.
2
Prediction: Trump is setting the stage to move away from the alliance with the NATO nations, crediting the divorce on their failue to pay their fair share for defense. Think this will happen soon. However, the real reason is that he is splitting from NATO is because of his buddy Putin, who detests NATO. Putin obviously has the goods on Trump. Trump's next move will be to get rid of the Russian sanctions during or shortly after the summit with Putin. The Party of Trump, formerly known as the Repbulican Party and the Party of Lincoln, is really the Putin-Trump Party. Trump is in the process of absolving Putin of all his offenses that have endangered other nations and our democracy.
14
So, if Trump says it's"good to get along with Russia", why is he telling NATO members to ramp up militarization? Russia is the main reason for the alliance.
Why doesn't he reduce war threats in Europe like he did with N Korea, by waiving his magic wand?
There may be a good reason to do this, I think not, but if there is, this administration can't figure it out.
6
Nor anything else...
2
Greed. The American oligarchs want even more money. They're looking for more places to find it. This is one. They are preparing Trump to walk away from more of our international commitments, which will lower US government spending. And where will those savings go? To the oligarchs, of course, via another tax cut that disproportionately favors them over the other 99.99% of the population.
7
Who do we think gets most of the equipment-orders for the military spent by NATO? I'd expect it to be the US.
To me NATO spending is (in)directly funding research, jobs & growth in the US, regardless of who's investing. Given that dynamic, I'd expect it to be imbalanced at first glance, but once you look closer at which economy benefits most from NATO military spending (US) it to be a lot fairer.
Why do I not see a reference toward this notion in this article / the news media?
5
Time to stop shaking our heads in disbelief at what Germany did in World War II. We've lost all moral credibility. We've allowed a documented racist, a person documented as corrupt, an admitted by his own voice sexual assaulter, to become the head of the Republican party. And through their acquiescence to every will of their leader, no matter how damaging to this country and the world, the resemblance can be seen of Americans to Nazis and it's beyond terrifying.
18
Are you Americans at all ashamed or embarrassed that this comical specimen, Donald Trump, is what you picked to represent your country?
18
The United States has chosen to spend a virtual fortune on it's military. It constantly increases the Pentagon's budget and provides the most advanced and costly equipment on the face of the earth to its' forces.
This does not mean that those expenditures are in the best interest of our country or the world as a whole. It simply means that that is our choice. Not necessarily the choice of other countries.
We choose to keep forces in other countries not only for what we deem to be our own protection but also to have a level of control over those countries and their governments. Threatening other nations with troop withdrawal if they don't pay more seems to be a bit hollow. It appears more to the point that the US is now so heavily in debt, due to military expenditures and cannot ring out more money from our economy without dumping all social programs still operating that Trump wants to look at another revenue stream. That revenue stream appears to be our allies military budgets.
Perhaps rather than attempt to bully our allies we should first look to a complete and thorough audit of the Pentagon and all of our military forces. I read recently that this has never been done and that estimates of waste run as high as $125 billion. This might be a good place to start. After all our allies might not agree with us and just might welcome the withdrawal of our forces.
6
"Mr. Trump has repeatedly questioned its (NATO`s) value and has claimed that its members are taking advantage of the United States."
Did Putin write this memo ?
I suggest that the European NATO countries & Canada give their troops a big pay raise to boost their defence expenditures and call it a day. The money will recycle back into the NATO nations and the US manufacturers/products will be ignored due to the animosity against Trump & his abettors.
11
Obama was beginning to get Bush's bloated defense budget under control, bringing it down from a high of apx $750B to a little under $600B. I'd like to see that trend continue, with the bulk of the savings going towards US infrastructure, healthcare and education.
If the USA significantly cut back its financial expenditures to NATO (but not entirely and not its commitment to defend allies) would European countries (especially Germany, Netherlands, Denmark and Norway) feel compelled to increase their own contributions out of real defense needs?
If so, then to that extent the USA (specifically, the US taxpayer) is currently subsidizing not only their military budgets but also their social welfare budgets which are made possible in part by their low defense spending.
I believe the current NATO relationship is problematic. I don't believe Trump has the answer. He has asked to increase the total defense budget yet further. But I think, as usual, he taps into the public's awareness of a real problem to gain support to pursue HIS OWN personal agenda.
A little "tough love" may be what NATO needs from the USA right now, to make it stronger, to gain greater commitments from its members. Unfortunately I don't think that's Trump's real goal.
4
However, NATO’s fundamental bargain continues to be overwhelmingly advantageous to the United States. European states would be both less willing and less able to help us without NATO. European allies would likely spend even less—not more—on defense without the constant hectoring of the United States within NATO.
Diplomatically, we would need to negotiate European states into participating in our endeavors rather than expecting them to proffer a good excuse to remain out. That may seem a subtle difference, but it isn’t.
Diplomatically, we would need to negotiate European states into participating in our endeavors rather than expecting them to proffer a good excuse to remain out. That may seem a subtle difference, but it isn’t.
Diplomatically, we would need to negotiate European states into participating in our endeavors rather than expecting them to proffer a good excuse to remain out. That may seem a subtle difference, but it isn’t.
3
When he writes, "there is growing frustration in the United States that some allies have not stepped up as promised”, it sounds like a growing majority of citizens are telling him to do this. Nothing could be farther from the truth. He and Putin are the only ones who are frustrated.
11
As the US all by itself spends more than all the rest of the world combined for its military, surely it isn't for others to try to keep up with such a pace, but more appropriately for the US to bring itself more in line with reality. It isn't as if the rest of us are planning to start a war, and we do have what it takes to deter Putin if somebody would stop blowing kisses to him.
12
The US miltary has used and still needs the NATO infrastructure for its various military compaigns and adventures such as in the Middle East, Afganistan, the Coreas, etc etc. And hopefully to keep a watchfull eye on Russian expansion appetite in Europe. The latter task is losing in importance for Mr Trump who lacks basic understanding of the world order and is desperate to show his loyalty to Mr Putin.
The Europeans have been warned but American people have to be careful not to end on the wrong side of history.
3
I do agree with Trump that NATO should carry its weight. I also agree that 35000 troops are also an unnecessary waste of huge capital and massive man power sitting idle in a friendly nation. They will be far more effective and useful here in the US. They can be used to round up the thousands of gangs terrorizing our decaying neighborhoods and or patrolling our porous borders at no extra funding because they are already on the military pay roll. They will be very easily retrained to fulfill any of this functions
4
Just imagine the uproar if Obama had behaved the way Trump does with both friends and foes, tyrants in particular.
Or anyone of us, for that matter...
6
The U.S. must leave NATO. Trump and the 42% of voters who support him no longer believe in freedom and democracy, or protecting Europe, and their allegiance is to an aggressive Russia.
Trump threatens to take his boats and go home. Will they be used, instead, to protect China's takeover of the South China Sea, currently an open trade zone? Escort oil tankers from Russia? Block trade routes? Attack Europe from the West while Russia attacks from the East?
Congress refuses to slash military spending, little of which is spent on NATO. NATO members do pay their share. The bulk of U.S. military spending is in secret "special ops" in the Middle East, Somalia and Yemen, run not by the military, but by expensive, hired privateers, like Blackwater.
The remaining 28 countries must build their armies. Buy weapons from France and Germany. Form alliances in Africa, Canada and Mexico.
Trump has an itchy trigger finger and the U.S. has become an unstable ally. The three branches of government have become one, taking commands from a man who would be dictator. For those who do not support his lack of honor, and his administration's attempt at a coup d'état, vote at the mid-terms.
13
As far as I am aware the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with NATO and was furthermore justified by fake intelligence on "weapons of mass destruction" fabricated by the USA. Paramilitary private American companies made fortunes on the war. The invasion sparked the rise of ISIS that caused unspeakable suffering for the local populations and became the biggest security threat for Europe, obviously costing fortunes in security measures. However, speaking about debts and unpaid bills, why did the USA leave the Paris Agreement? How much does the USA owe the rest of the world for being one of the worst polluters and contributors to CO2 emission causing climate change?
10
America continues to degrade the culture through military excess and the connecting evil mortality of boosting violence. Other countries should not expand their military and continue to oppose American military values.
3
So, the US spends billions and billions on their military. Is that supposed to be a good thing, or is it simply due to imperialist ambitions causing the US to wreak havoc all over the world? How much of the US military spending is for actual defense?
8
This kind of thing is why Putin wanted Trump elected. Trump will weaken NATO, he will continue to withdraw the United States from international agreements and will cede our strategic influence and superiority to Russia (and China). Unwittingly or not, Trump is ushering in a New World Order and the United States will no longer reign supreme. And apparently all Trump's followers notice or care about is the comparatively miniscule threat of MS-13 (more people die in America every day from gun violence than in a year from MS-13), banning abortion and erasing Obama's achievements. We're losing the ship, folks.
7
Clearly Eurooe has taken advantage of America’s willingness to protect them for free.
Time for each NATO ally to bolster their own military as they had agreed to in the alliance.
It’s long overdue. Trump is correct
3
Protect them from what? Higher oil prices from a stable Middle East?
2
Trump is ignorant on several issues. 1. the US troop presence now is minimal as compared to the cold war days, and US troops aren't in Germany to guarantee safety but to have a presence and maintain base logistics support. 2. the US needs that presence as Germany is strategically located; that's the reason most wounded from Iraq and Afghanistan ended up in US hospitals in Germany. Ramstein AFB is headquarters for the United States Air Forces in Europe - Air Forces Africa and also for NATO Allied Air Command. 3. due to German history, the country de-emphasized military might - should Germany spent 2% of its GDP on the military, it would be on par with Russia (somewhere between $60B and $70B), something that the Russians might get concerned about. 4. Defense spending reflects a countries' priorities - Germans simply are not inclined to arm up, again, for many historic reasons.
3
"4. Defense spending reflects a countries' priorities"
The question in my mind is simply whether European countries would feel compelled to increase their defense expenditures if the USA drastically cut back its own. To the extent that they would the USA (specifically, the US taxpayer) is subsidizing their military requirements, and by extension, their entire social welfare budgets as well.
I would rather see us cut back. Obama was bringing Bush's huge run up of defense expenditures under control, from a high of around $750B in 2010 to under $600B. I'd like to see that trend continue, with the bulk of the money being shifted to US infrastructure, healthcare and education.
3
Why did we bail out Europe with the Marshall Plan after WW II? Was it out of the goodness of our heart? No, it was simply a strategic move to counter Soviet expansionism, but it was money well spent. Ultimately the USSR capitulated to the West in literally dismembering itself in accordance with Gorbachev’s policy of Perestroika. At the time Russia was economically on its knees. Did we help them with the equivalent of another Marshall Plan? No, we did not because Russia had done us the favor of neutralizing itself. We thus had an historical advantage, but then we blew it by acting as if Russia still was a threat when we invited the former nations of the Warsaw Pact into NATO and then trained our guns from their borders against Russia. It was an unnecessary provocation which Putin cannot forgive or forget, but we can thank George H. W. Bush for his stupidity.
At this juncture Europe is totally useless strategically. It serves no purpose. Trump is therefore willing to risk their worthless alliance by making certain overtures to Putin which might be interpreted as righting the wrong. The prize is Russia itself that vast country whose market potentially dwarfs all of Europe combined. By flattering Putin and accepting Russia into the world of nations, Trump is giving our country a head start over Europe in penetrating that market.
In the final analysis it’s all about the wealth of nations. Which country can outsmart the other for its own economic advantage?
2
The “market” in Russia as you say may be vast but it is corrupt and unreliable. The only entity who can count on it is Trump himself who could become an honorary Russian oligarch under Putin. Does this benefit the United States? Doubtful. Better to have reliable and productive trading partners like the EU.
6
Most commenters miss the point. Its not about Money, if it was we would not have seen drastic cuts in Corporate Taxes and Taxes for the 1%.
It is about having an excuse to ally with Russia, wait and see.
There has been a systematic dismantling of all Nato alliances by the US since Trump took office, NATO is Military , but what binds it together is economic interests. Trump is exploding those ties, with everyone except his handler, Putin.
9
me interesting reading;
https://www.thenation.com/article/the-ways-to-destroy-democracy/
and
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/germany/hitlercons...
In Trump's world, a war is good. But he is going to go to war with no allies except Israel, a country of 6,000,000 Jews and Saudi Arabia, an Arab country with no Jews. His military will have no people of color willing to fight for him as he is an unabashed racist. In short, nobody with any sense would go to war with Trump.
Let's get rid of this fool so that we can have allies and a military that can defend us in a real war.
3
It's not clear that Trump would side with Europe if there was a threat from Russia. What is clear is that the US under G.W. Bush abused the intent of NATO and thrust of its members when he coerced the other NATO Members to join in the invasion of Afghanistan after Saudis allegedly manned the planes on September 11, 2001. The justification for the attack on the Jihadists in Afghanistan was even more ridiculous after the US had backed them for two decades against a secular government just because they were supported by Russia who was then a boogie man.
Similar augments could be made about the coercion of NATO members to participate in the invasions of Iraq, Libya and Syria. If the US wants to save money, it should abandon these useless and heinous imperialist invasions. As for Europe it can find better ways of using its resources.
2
Curiously expressing a threat to blow up NATO in preparation for his meeting with Putin. No coincidence here, is there? And let's see, what country and leader benefits most from this? Wouldn't be Putin's Russia, would it...?
4
Why is there no mention in this article of the 2014 Wales summit, at which NATO countries pledged the 2% by 2024? Why is Trump berating them for not reaching 2% 6 years before they all pledged that they would? What is wrong with the NYT that they don't bring up this point? Why have a formal declaration of this goal at a summit if Trump is going to bad-mouth the countries that made the declaration? Why is there no discussion of whether these countries are increasing their contributions towards the 2%??
9
I think Europe would be better off with an defense alliance without the US. Most wars the US initiated for the last 25 years were not to the benefit of Europe. To the contrary: millions of refugees were created that now need to be helped by European countries,
It's actually the US that owes Europe because it's European governments and taxpayers that have to pay for the mess that the US created in the middle east !
10
Not all military spending by the U.S. is on behalf of NATO. Much of it is spent elsewhere. Maybe Europe should spend more on its military, but as other readers point out, they already spend a lot more than Russia. When it comes to specific equipment, even without the U.S., European powers have a vast advantage in aircraft carriers over Russia. Russia, however, has a vast numerical edge in tanks, even if we include the U.S. military. NATO without the U.S. seems also short on fighter aircraft.
The point is that spending alone is an imperfect guide for assessing military strength.
4
The way Trump government is imposing their daily fatwas on international communities regarding almost every thing and establishing their control over the world affairs, we do not need United Nations, International Courts, WTO or human rights organizations. America under the Trump President ship can fulfill all the requirements without spending even a dime. Time has come to dissolve these organizations and hand over the command to Trump, sooner is better.
The problem is that the biggest threat to Canada's security and independence is the USA. So I can't see a single reason to rush out and do whatever this guy says.
5
One of the few...very few...valid policy points Trump has.
1
kaaaching! more money for his rich MIC pals. I am certain Traitor Trump’s boss Putin would like the EU weakened militarily.
He sure is eager to please dictators.
2
We discuss this matter a little bit different here in Germany. First of all, the U.S. is spending approx. 4% on military, okay. But at least 1 or even 1,5% is just to maintain the dominance between the US and the other countries. When the US has 13 air craft carriers the number 2 on the list has 4. This dominance is used for US policies mainly and does not primarly benefit the NATO. So if you deduct 1% from 4% there are 3% remaining for ALL US military expenses which include all NATO related stuff mainly in Europe but then you also have your other allies in Japan, Southkorea, Phillipines who are partners to you in a totally different alliance and on top of that you also have to protect your allies in the midEast Saudi Arabia and Israel which is also a different story. And to all FOUR partners you go and tell them that the US is spending 4% and wants a Fair share from it's partners! ?? If the US would do a rough list of expenditures per alliance the percentage for NATO would be much lower and the whole discussion among NATO would be different..
5
Stefan - The link below provides the most current information I can find on how much the US contributes specifically to NATO (as opposed to those other alliances you mentioned).
Here is a question for you, how much does the USA need a presence in Europe in order to defend itself from Russia? Hardly at all. There is no need for a land defense as the USA shares no border with Russia. There is only a need for missile and cyber defenses. Cyber defenses can be located anywhere. It is helpful to the USA to have missile defenses within Europe, but it's most helpful to have them in Asia since a Russian launched missile would probably go over the Pacific rather than the Atlantic.
So basically, the entire USA contribution is for the benefit of European countries.
What would Germany and the rest of Europe do if the USA withdrew its NATO contribution? Would they feel exposed to a Russian threat and raise their defense budgets accordingly?
To the extent that they did, that is the same extent to which the American taxpayer is currently subsidizing their defense.
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/us-pays-2214-nat...
3
J Jencks .. the link shows the contributions to the NATO fund for paying personel and the headquarter in Brussels etc. the payments are according to the GDP just like with the UN... but that was not my point. I was trying to show that for us here in Germany our military expenses of 1.2% is the contribution to NATO because we only have one alliance whereas the US has several alliances and 3,36% military expenes (in 2016). Mr.Trump can't go to every alliance and claim that the US pay way too much with 3.36%. There are 35.000 men in Germany but there are also 35.000 men in Southkorea and I think even more in Japan and also on the Phillipines. These are no NATO allies so the US should not put them in the NATO expediture box. Just go online and check how many warship, aircraft carriers etc. are operating in the South Pacific or near the gulf states. They are definately not on a NATO mission.
In general, the US is the biggest and most important NATO partner but in my opinion Mr.Trump is just again pushing partners around because they hesitate to strike back. But when facing not so friendly people like Xi or Putin he is never talking tough. That's a real handicap ..
1
The original purpose of NATO? To keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down. It’s worked remarkably well over the decades. Why shake things up merely for the sake of shaking things up? US troops (about 10% as many as during the Cold War, by the way), are in Germany to defend the interests of the United States, which, as a status quo power, obviously prefers stability to change — or at least used to.
Nothing would make Putin happier than to see the US withdraw from Eurasia. Whether he would be quite so happy with the prospect of a heavily armed, reunified Germany right next door is another matter. Two percent of German GDP would buy an awful lot of firepower. Is that really what Trump wants and the world needs?
Finally, I wonder if he even knows that thousands of German and other European troops are supporting the US military in Afghanistan. When I mention this to Americans, they often seem surprised.
8
Afghanistan: The USA was the first (and only) country in the history of the NATO, that received the contractual NATO support of its alies (due to 9.11). This is the only reason why German troops are engaged in Afghanistan for almost 20 years now.
3
That is the price for being a SUPERPOWER, but I guess you're done with that.
2
Why should the US taxpayer be subsidizing the defense budgets of rich countries like Germany, Netherlands, Denmark and Norway?
I'd rather see some of that subsidy go back into the USA, to fund things such as healthcare and education. Those things interest me more than America being a SUPERPOWER.
1
As hard as it can be, at times it is necessary to look past Trump to the issue.
If the USA is effectively subsidizing European countries' defense budgets, rich countries like Germany, it is reasonable to question the current relationship. The Marshall Plan is over. Western Europe is very much on its feet and should be financially self-supporting with regard to defense.
That doesn't mean taking NATO apart, not by any means! It just means everybody pulling their own weight. Absolute cooperation and commitment to mutual defense is as necessary as ever.
Trump, of course, will handle this like a bull in a china shop.
1
I like to go to first sources when possible. Here is a link to the official NATO website, a report showing member countries' contributions. Look at the chart on page 2 to see who is contributing.
Germany, despite its wealth, lags seriously behind, while much poorer countries which border on Russia and are more aware of the threat contribute much more.
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2017_06/20170629_...
*sigh* The agreement made in 2014, was for 2% within a decade. (That's 2024!) If your President wants to rip up yet another agreement, but please, don't try to make out like it doesn't exist right now.
6
The chart on page 2 of the NATO report (link below) shows the growth in expenditures from 2014 to 2017. Germany (one of the richest countries) in particular lags far behind and at the current rate will not achieve even 2% by 2024. Meanwhile, other poorer countries like Latvia and Lithuania have have increased their expenditures at a much higher rate and have already almost achieved the 2% target.
Norway, Denmark and Netherlands, though wealthy, are also lagging way behind and won't reach the 2024 target at the current rate.
Of course, the rich countries are happy to let the poor countries take the brunt of the economic impact.
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2017_06/20170629_...
1
Follow the money. Who benefits most when Trump and his administration throw the world order into chaos?
Or else what oh wise man? The U.S will not stand beside you if Russia invades another country? Or China or North Korea?
The allies of this president are not our friends, would somebody from Congress tell him this. Or are they afraid of getting re-elected? We all know the answer to that question don't we?
Maybe Trump's preparing to tell Putin that NATO should be dissolved.
1
Putin wants the US to leave NATO. Everything he has wanted from Mr. Trump he has gotten. DJT's dunning NATO allies is performance art - and bad acting, at that. Mr.Trump will pull the U.S. out of NATO by the time he and Vlad have an attaboy, back-slapping, summit. Even our allies know it's faux indignation. Trump has cast his lot with the pretend Russian president, and we're supposed to buy it all. Nope. It's just bad acting. At the end of the summit, economic sanctions imposed by Pres. Obama by Executive Order will be rescinded by DJT's Executive Order. Those imposed by the U.S. Senate with a vote of 98-2, cannot be over-turned by executive order, so will remain. Over-turning the bulk of sanctions essentially states, "You're forgiven for invading Ukraine, 10,000 deaths doing so, and blowing up an international flight imprudently flying over Ukraine, killing everyone on board.
Donald Trump will replace Benedict Arnold as the greatest traitor in American history.
6
He's jetting off to Finland next week to meet with Putin. If Putin orders the USA to leave NATO, Trump will submit, conservatives will cheer, and Congress will finally have to act. This disgraceful behavior has got to come to an end soon.
5
I often wonder - What has Putin got on Trump?
1
Isn't it better to stop aggression where it starts and not wait until it crosses the Atlantic and is at our doorstep?
2
40 million killed in WW I. 80 million killed in WW II. Whole countries laid to waste. Cities blasted and burned and the debris churned under the treads of armored vehicles. 50+ years of active conflict carried out on a global scale.
That is what NATO exists to prevent. That is why the EU project needs to succeed. That is why we work *with* the UN and the WTO. We already *know* how one-to-one agreements and go it your own way works out. We have photos. And film. Heck, we still have a few eyewitnesses.
8
A note to our European allies. Let me first apologize for having to put up with our idiotic president. He is a child in a man's ill-fitting suit. He thinks he is negotiating with you when in reality he is a bully. That's how he "makes deals." He harasses you and calls you out and embarrasses you and whines that you are treating him horribly. Then when you back down and give the baby what he wants he uses that as a "win" and his base loves it. Don't let him bully you.
Secondly,this is exactly why Putin put him in the White House. To cause friction between the U.S. and Europe. If Trump pulls troops out of the EU, Putin has free reign to invade and Trump knows this. We are all waiting anxiously to find out what Mueller has found out what Putin has on Trump to make him behave this way. If you think you have it bad, we have to put up with him day in and day out. It's torture.
7
Although I agree with the President I deplore the threats. This make us as a people look thuggish. We know Trump is a boorish bully but the vast majority of Americans are decent and resent his thuggery. He is pandering the those who wo;;owe n the nations baser instincts and behavior. This is not how any American President should behave. I suspect by now everyone knows this is just chum for the Trump deplorables,
2
Trump wants Germany to up its defenses and military? Hello... France dial 911 right now!
5
If there was ever a situation in which a military coup could succeed in this country, we are witnessing its birth. This is the perfect Manchurian Candidate scenario where our most powerful leader is our most destructive enemy. This "America First" nonsense will leave us alone and diminished and surrender our historical allies to Russia's worst proclivities. Once destroyed, it will take a generation to re-assemble the global security we once had. How far must this idiot go before our Generals perceive his Presidency as an existential threat and act to defend the Republic by whatever means most expedient? It is no longer in the realm of science fiction or fantasy. His unpredictability is our undoing.
4
Trump is more utterly inept, inappropriate and oafish, self-adoring and obsessively demanding of loyalty, vengeful, and just plain loony-tunes than King George III. The sooner he is taken to a qualified doctor (one with a valid and not questionable license to practice) to give him a thorough psychiatric examination, the better. For the entire free world. Why are his GOP court jesters even hesitating at this point - except to stuff an extremist judge into the Supreme Court. Well, I can't think of a better man than Barack Obama to be on the Supreme Court once these filth-driven GOP Trump supporters are voted out of office. I really can't. I hope that blue wave becomes a tsunami for all our sakes.
3
"Or else".... what????
What???...
Good thing nobody any longer believes him or cares.
2
Trump is beyond an embarrassment to the USA, he is a menace to the world, the Mussolini of our era. He did, after all, steal Mussolini's charge to "Drain the Swamp", and has been almost following his footsteps exactly, only to be stopped by our nations built in checks and balances. Shame upon those on the right who follow this man blindly without ever questioning his openly fascist direction. To the people of the world, if you happen to be reading this comment, please accept my apologies and my sincere commitment to fight this cabal in every legal way possible.
5
The president and his honchos are a bunch of con men who should be imprisoned. Threatening other countries will get him nowhere. They would be fools to listen to this maniac Trump and they won’t.
2
Military spending doesn't seem to bring security; the Ruskis are winning without firing any shots. The Europeans could satisfy Trump if they sent him more money. Buy more condos in Trump Tower, or move NATO headquarters to Mir-a-Lago.
3
As Groucho Marx said: “ He may talk like an idiot and look like an idiot. But don’t let that fool you. He really is an idiot.”
6
Trump is trivializing the strategic advantages to the U.S. of NATO and of the allied countries participating.
It's a simple fact that any aggressor nation seeking to conquer Western Europe will seek domination over the Atlantic region, eventually. That would affect U.S. sea businesses from fishing to trade and furthermore the U.S. would be a likely impediment to the power attempting to secure itself in that region. Conflict with the U.S. would become inevitable. Forestalling such an outcome by defending U.S. interests with Europe as the battlefield would be priceless in terms of strategic value to the U.S.
The issue of percentage investments in military spending is not crucial to the importance of NATO as Trump's behavior implies. What is important is their participation and ability to participant equivalent to their agreements. Treating this as a deal breaker indicates that Trump thinks that NATO may be invaluable to Europe but not of much value to the U.S., which only someone who does not agree that NATO has strategic value would think for a second.
3
"The issue of percentage investments in military spending is not crucial to the importance of NATO..."
You have not convinced me. I believe NATO is hugely important but its effectiveness depends in large part on EVERY member country being thoroughly prepared. Defense budgets are a partial measure of that preparedness. Check out the NATO report in the link below. Check out page 2. Nearly all the NATO countries fail to meet the 2% threshold, with several at less than 1%.
We can quibble over whether 2% is the right baseline. But with the USA contributing around 3.6% the imbalance is clear.
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2017_06/20170629_...
2
If you observed the time required to mount the gulf war, moving large forces into a war zone takes many weeks. Even in the 1940's, the attackers who are not facing existing and defense in depth arranged forces can advance great distances in just days. Timeliness in having forces where they are needed can determine the outcomes of battles and wars. Having U.S. forces in place and ready to defend against attack is the highest priority.
What is the word, "grouses," doing in what purports to be a news item. If it is "opinion," then it should be in the "Opinion" section.
The US is on the cusp of not being able to finance its global defense commitments. Either the American people are willing to be taxed at a higher rate or sacrifice safety net spending - or the priorities for US military commitments have to be established and enforced. At present neither of the first two options seem feasible.
When NATO was established the quip was that the role of the organization was to keep Russia out, the Americans in and the Germans down. The Russians are out and the Germans are no longer down, so the question raised by Trump is how much do the NATO allies want to keep the Americans in.
NATO countries made a commitment to Obama, not to Trump. They promised to raise their defense spending to 2% of GDP. Many haven't fulfilled that obligation. As the poem says, "a promise made is a debt unpaid." America's NATO allies have had a free ride for so long that they are shocked by the notion that a promise is an unpaid obligation - a DEBT.
3
Surely by now American citizens will accept as a reasonable possibility that Donald Trump occupies the White House as a Russian asset. President Trump’s recent disruptive statements aimed at our long term allies—NATO, the EU, the G7, (including Canada, our neighbor and good friend)—serve to advance the long term political interests of President Putin to corrode the post war unity of the Western Alliance.
Nothing would advance Russian national interests and fulfill its international, expansionist aspirations more than the undermining of Western institutions, which have served as a bulwark against Putin’s predatory designs to recapture its lost Soviet era hedgemony over Eastern Europe.
In light of President Trump’s embrace of political ideas that better serve Russia than they do America; when his insulting rejection of long established alliances threaten long established precepts of American foreign policy and when the abdication of American leadership of the Western Alliance is in the offing, then there would appear reasonable justification for the American people to insist upon an official inquiry by Congress into whether the Office of the presidency has been compromised to benefit a foreign power.
5
Is NATO a European defence alliance or is it an ally of America’s projection of its power world wide? All NATO countries including the USA outspend Russia by a factor of 12. France and Germany alone spend some 20% more than Russia’s defence budget, which has to be put in the context that Russia’s economy is the size of Spain’s.
The EU countries contribute $250 billion in defence spending compared to Russia’s $65 billion - what exactly is to be gained by spending more? Surely the question is to spend more effectively?
6
The president warns NATO spend more or else...
Our commitment to NATO benefits us in many ways with our relationships to the many countries who are our Allies and with whom we do have common goals.
Many countries contribute to military missions that are strategic and helpful to the US, and by joining NATO operations, and also being homes to our US naval, air force, and intelligence bases.
The 2% goal on economic output for participation by other countries makes sense to strive for and some have already achieved it but surely not by the president insulting and bullying our longtime Allies. His threats and isolationist policies will lead the Europeans to take care of their own security and boost their own defense cooperation.
6
Let me get this straight: We're chastising others for not buying more of our killing machines? What the hell is going on with people in this country? And we wonder why everyone hates us. They have good reason. Either we are killing up others at the bequest of multinational corporations or we're selling weapons to others to do it.
8
Trump is no position to demand anything from NATO since he has no knowledge of what NATO is and how it functions. The man is ignorant and I am ashamed to be an American with a president who is such a disgusting ignoramus.
7
Or else what! What a maroon!
6
We used to paint the defense of the West in idealistic terms. Supposedly we were making the world safe for democracy. That was not it at all. We used Europe strategically as a buffer against the expansionism of the USSR. Now it no longer serves that purpose because Russia is no longer the threat it once was. If Western Europe didn’t believe that, they’d be willing to pay their fair share and more for their defense. As it is, they’re willing to let us pay because it’s no skin off their nose. Trump is at last calling their bluff in effect telling them if it isn’t worth that much to them, then it’s not worth that much to us either.
On the home front the defense of the West and our role in it are just talking points for the Democrats who just use it for their own political gain. If you don’t believe that, take a look at Kamala Harris or Maxine Waters. Do you think they’re going to be the ones to save the West if it really came down to that?
" If Western Europe didn’t believe that, they’d be willing to pay their fair share and more for their defense." Right, and they proved their commitment to freedom during WWII as well, when French guns couldn't pivot; French generals couldn't plan or lead, and French soldiers deserted in droves--not to mention collaboration with the occupying army?
1
Yes, the whole idea of French resistance was a myth. The French being very practical in nature took the easy path of collaborating with the Nazis during their occupation. When the war was over, they were all singing the Marseillaise. There was also not one Nazi to be found in Germany and not one German knew what all that smoke being belched from the extermination camps was all about. Now they’re giving us lessons in morality as if they are the embodiment of virtue.
1
Regarding the present-day threat of Russia:
I find it interesting that former eastern block NATO members are near the top of the list in terms of defense budgets. They seem keenly aware of a Russia threat.
Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Roumania, Poland
These are not rich countries. Compared to countries like Germany (contribution 1.22%) they can much less afford it. But they know their survival in the face of Putin requires it.
Of all our NATO allies, it's Germany that disturbs me the most. With all their wealth they do comparatively far too little. If the threat of withdrawing American troops from Germany wakes them up and gets them to take action, then I'm all for the threat. Re-deploy those troops (and the benefits they bring to local economies) to Poland and the Baltic countries. That's what I would advise if asked.
1
International alliances respond best to mutual interests, respect and cooperation over extended time scales.
Feudalism and threats are not the stuff by which a strong, manipulative new entrant, or at least its leader will prevail in the long term.
Already it is becoming clear that the new friends of the leader (North Korea, Russia etc) are cut from a different cloth to those who have been traditional allies through thick and thin for decades.
Diplomatic skills and reviews by the leader should be part of the future (one way or the other) rather than rudeness and cast off mentality with which they are being assailed currently.
We should remember that the future isn't a sprint to the next election or the ratings from dubious domestic polls. Rather that the future is and should be a well planned marathon with mutually agreed objectives.
4
A much better option than forcing its allies to spend more on military is that
the US starts reducing its military budget and by that way bring its spending
in line with the other NATO countries.
It of course must then stop with its useless wars which never (or very seldom)
over the last 70 years has brought the desired result.
It would not only save a lot of money that can be spend on much more useful
things for its citizens but also would save a lot of lives.
I cannot understand that a president who is for America first and wants to
bring its soldiers home has a need to increase spending on all kind of
useless military hardware.
He should make sure all those returning soldiers have a good home, healthcare,
education for their children and much more.
11
Of course, N, you cannot understand that a stronger military--especially the strongest--is the best means of discouraging aggression. Why do you imagine that Iran calls us the Great Satan? We are the only power in the world preventing them from attaining the goals that the Ayatollahs wish to achieve, and we only play that role through military superiority and willingness to use it.
Now if one's goal is in accord with the Ayatollah's, or Putin's, or any other hostile leaders, then, of course, arguing for a weak military is just the ticket.
The Ayatollahs have a Made in America stamp on them with the US bringing to power and sustaining the Sjah for cheap oil. It paived the way for them, that is why the US should stop trying to shape the world to its liking.
NATO is a deterent of which it has more than enough.
The Ayatollahs are the result of US supporting the Sjah and his regime for cheap oil. NATO was designed as a deterent alliance and it still has more than enough of that.
Spend more on defense or else Trump will go crying to his buddy Putin.
2
At the end of World War II, Europe was devastated and the economies nearly non-existent. Without the Marshall Plan it might have taken fifty years to recover from that kind of devastation. What is the value to the U.S. that it should place upon having the battlefield in a war whose outcome will determine the fortunes of people in North America having occur in Europe rather than America?
1
I’ve had the experience many times when I’m the one picking up the bar tab, everyone suddenly orders up to the premium drinks—Jack Daniels, sex on the beach, etc., but I notice when they’re buying their own, it’s strictly well drinks for them. Trump is a seasoned hotelier so he knows how it works. I’ve sadly learned my lesson. When you’re paying, you have a lot of friends. Europe is in the same category as all the other moochers in the world. With friends like that we don’t need enemies.
3
I wish the NYTimes had included some actual analysis in this story. Is the claim that the NATO allies have not lived up to their 2% commitment made with Obama true?
Yes or No.
7
Dan, as I understand it, the commitment is a 10 year project, that is, a work in process. I don't remember the deadline.
It would be interesting to see what progress is being made towards the goals. I saw an article recently that stated little to no progress had been taken but would have liked to have seen an update/something concrete in this article.
If they are doing nothing, then Trump has a point - being made in his usual inelegant fashion.
(Yes and no) AFAI5 is there a deadline, which is not due now but in the 2020ies.
The definition is not crisp. For example is Germany paying 50bn annually (more than we pay for defense) for migrants that came due consequences of the war in Irak (in which Germany did not participate) or the subsequent IS terror that was the result of this war or the people fleeing the yet destabilized continent.
AFAIR The question is, how these expenses are considered.
1
He is not speaking for me nor, most likely, the bulk of America.
9
The fear for the Europeans defense is from Russia. If an approach of peace with Russia can be worked our it would relieve a lot of savings and peaceful sleeps for every one.
Germany welcomes a healthy debate about it's future military position in the world and I'm sure most Germans these days would welcome less reliance on the US. In fact, speaking as a German for myself, I think Nato should be transformed into a European defense force with America as a strategic partner only. It's time our European militaries are operating on their own terms and avoid being perpetually drawn into an ambivalent debate about what does and doesn't constitute a "western alliance".
7
there are more than 30+ military bases on German soil. and there are tons of military bases in Japan as well. ask yourself why?
both countries are trade and technology powerhouse after WWII. the US considered that as a threat. so don't expect the US to withdraw its troops from Japan, Germany, or South Korea any time soon.
1
When I first came from the U.S. to my adopted German city, the city (as I remembered it) had 5 U.S. military installations and a U.S hospital with at least 4 or 5 more installations within easy day-tripping distance and a few recreation centers in scenic places. Even before the Iron Curtain came down, the number of installations was shrinking, and the reunification of Germany brought the number down to the point where the last one in the city was closed, along with the hospital, and only ONE within a ninety minute train ride still remains. This pullback was taking place all over Bavaria, which had lion's share of American troops.
So proportionally, there isn't much more of an American military presence to draw down. I don't know if the military hospital in Wiesbaden (if I have the city right) is still open but it was and maybe still is serving injured troops flown in from such areas of involvement as the Gulf states and possibly Afghanistan.
I have no information about how much the U.S. contributes to Europe's defense and how much Europe (and each NATO country within it) contributes, so I can't come to an opinion on how much more Europe should contribute. I can only surmise that the U.S. has been progressively and aggressively decreasing its own contribution in Germany, adjusted for inflation, as the fall of the Iron Curtain and reunification have made Germany appear, and hopefully be, safer from encroaching Communism.
Your article reads "in the face of threats from Russia." What, precisely, are these threats? The only person making threats (constantly) is Donald Trump. Putin's statements have been conciliatory and calm.
4
The threats? Ask Crimea? Maybe Ukraine? Wonder what Poland thinks?
1
You didn't, by any chance, notice that Russia stole Crimea from Ukraine a few years back and used its proxies and its own military personnel to steal some of eastern Ukraine as well?
That's not the end of it.
There is also Transnistria, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia. There is also the 2-3 times weekly buzzing by the Russian military of Baltic countries' airspace, with incursions all the way into it every couple of months.
If you believe Putin is not a territorial threat to his neighbors I encourage you to read up more.
http://hir.harvard.edu/article/?a=14502
http://www.newsweek.com/nato-intercepted-110-russian-aircraft-around-bal...
2
We have 35,000 troops in Germany to "defend" them in case of war. Can't they defend themselves? A small troop presence is fine, but why so many. These are different times then immediately post WW2.
5
Many of the US facilities and troops are located in Germany, but are used internationally.
Just for example: Ramstein and Landstuhl are mainly used by the US in order to organize and support their wars on the African continent. Important to know is, that Germany has no access to these facilities and is in no sense participating in any decisions. Therefore these troops are not there „to defend Germany“, but they belong to the 36 military bases, the US is maintains globally for own reasons.. Take the war in Irak, in which Germany has choosen not to participate, as it was defined in our 2+4 contract. Nevertheless were larger parts of this war supported by the US from Ramstein or troops were transported from and to Irak.
Overall you should keep in mind that the US Army is not located in Germany (and stays there) because it was invited to defend the country. The 2+4 contract from 1989 simply ends the status of an occupied country, and btw defines that our army can not be larger than 370.000 soldiers.
5
True, we can defend ourselves just fine. but remember your bases in germany also served as strategic locations for wars fought in the middle east and vietnam.
1
Does Trump know something that the rest of the world doesn’t know yet, that a war is coming and we all need to be prepared? If he does, it would be nice if he told us, or our leaders, in plain language who the opposition will be so appropriate preparations can be made. On the other hand he could just be crying “wolf!” so that people will look at him.
1
I sometimes wonder, does President Trump receive a bonus from the Russians for each goal achieved, or is it a lump sum upon completion.
11
The US chair at the world table will very soon be empty. Don't worry someone else will soon occupy it.
7
Recognize the three-year pattern: trump chums the water with an idea and a solution; listens to the reverberations; (consults Sean); then executes the idea with a complicit and quiet GOP.
Do not be surprised when the US leaves NATO (& WTO).
Do not be surprised when Putin adds more candles to his cake.
8
How about the U.S. spends less on its military? A lot less.
Invest in infrastructure. Increase Social Security benefits and provide Medicare for all. Put more resources into the National Science Foundation to spur innovation and new enterprises. Free tuition at public colleges and universities.
There's lots more I could list, but you get the idea.
With the big tax cut and budget deficit and the national debt, it's a zero-sum game. More bombs or more prosperous people. Choose one.
15
ll well and good but John Bolton has already complained that the UK does not spend enough despite being over the 2% limit.
Yet again the administration is undercutting themseleves but their stupidity.
3
Or else what?
Stop trying to bulliy everyone, or is that the only expertise you have?
7
Reporter Julie Hirschfeld Davis has made an important point: Trump letter betrays “a fundamental misunderstanding of how” the NATO “functions.”
Each member nation is supposed to contribute two percent of its GDP to the organizations. The U.S. being the wealthiest nation in the world, it contributes more than others. Yes, deadbeat nations need to be reminded when they fail to fulfill their obligations. But the country that does the reminding shouldn’t forget that it is dealing with sovereign nations. The tone of the letter that Mr. Trump has sent out is not different from the one a mafia boss would use when demanding the money owed him by his partners.
In dispatching the letter just a month before the scheduled NATO meeting, is Mr. Trump conveying a message to the allies that the can expect a repeat performance of what he did at the G 7 meeting in Quebec last month? As we know, he blew up the Quebec meet.
If that happens with the Brussels meeting next week, it is going to warm the heart of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, whom he will be meeting in Helsinki, Finland, soon after the NATO meeting.
I won’t be surprised that John Bolton, Trump's national security adviser who flew to Russia last week to arrange the long-trumpeted Trump-Putin summit, has reassured the Russian leader that the Brussels meeting was going to be just a forerunner to his meeting with Trump, “whose primary goal,” as rightly put in this report, “is sowing divisions within the [NATO] alliance.”
6
Was your experience with the tone of letters sent by mafia bosses based upon being the sender or the receiver of said letters? Did you receive one of the letters sent by Trump to our NATO "allies"?
1
As a European, I think that the USA should spend far less on NATO. In particular, I believe that some or even all US troops should leave NATO allies' soil. I don't think NATO allies should spend more on defense. The threat of Russian invasion has considerably lessened in the last few decades, and I believe the USA should have other priorities at home. Like education and healthcare maybe, but that's for the American citizens to decide.
8
Well, it is undoubtedly true that, at present, my country The Netherlands is not spending enough on its military.
I see suggestions cropping up here and there, though, that it has been like this since the post-war period, with various posters claiming that we built up our welfare state over the backs of American workers. It was only in the 1990s, however, that the Netherlands - lulled to sleep, perhaps, by the collapse of the Soviet Union and the global march of democracy - started spending less than 2% of the Gross Domestic Product on defence. Indeed, we once spent over 6% of our GDP on the military. I grew up in the 70s and 80s, and remember well how tanks would rumble through the streets of my home town. Now, however, they are all gone.
It is also important to bear in mind that, as other posters have pointed out, America's massive firepower has greatly benefited its political and economic position world-wide, allowing it to push its own agenda in countries far away from American shores. I therefore doubt if an increase in defence spending on this side of the Atlantic will translate into less defence spending in the USA - and a concomitant increase in spending on healthcare and education.
8
This is how Trump strokes his base and Putin at the same time. He doesn't care about NATO one way or the other, it's only relevant in his life to the extent he thinks it helps him personally.
4
Trump looks at the outrageous amount of money he is over-spending on the military, instead of American's health, education, infrastructure, then demands other countries, that put money to education, health, infrastructure must over-spend on military also, just so he doesn't look as rotten as he is, leaving the people to beg while the country falls apart.
4
Russia is not a threat to Western Europe. The barbaric hordes of the east no longer exist. NATO has no more threats to protect against. The Soviet Union has collapsed Russia is now far away and certainly doesn't have to capacity or the need to threaten the west. Germany and other European countries have more to worry about with their political leaderships being defeated by right wing nationalists that will break up international trade practices that could lead to the mercantilism that Trump is promoting. High tariff walls could endanger the world to future major depressions and wars.
3
Go tell that to Crimea. You seem to have a very short memory my friend.
The Crimean peninsula was annexed from Ukraine using military force by the Russian Federation (Putin) in February–March 2014
6
Russia can sell arms to warring entities and extracted resources in world commodity markets. The industries and technologies they have produced are so inferior to all other industrialized countries that nobody wants them. Russia would like to establish political relations with neighbors where Russian goods are purchased before all others to create markets which can enable them to develop industrial products that will be wanted elsewhere. They are going to use any means necessary to do this, and have show their intentions in several of the former countries in the U.S.S.R. Putin wishes to eliminate the world order established under the leadership of the U.S. because it could block his ability to coerce neighboring states into the kinds of relations with the Russian Federation that he seeks.
1
if we didn't poke the bear with a coup in Ukraine. I doubt Russia would've responded.
I leave that to the future historian after they pore through all the relevant evidence from all sides.
If you want proof that Putin has the dirt on Trump for years, beginning in the 80’s, of Trump being directly involved in corrupt Russian Real Estate deals and money laundering, look no further
Undermining NATO is the greatest gift Trump can hand Putin and he’s delivering to goods tied with a ribbon.
10
Trump sees world affairs through the lens of a real estate mogul. He ridicules and dismisses any issue that doesn't fit comport with his blinkered profit-loss world view. Peace dividend? What peace dividend? Too bad his advisers are so powerless.
1
Why does Trump feel far closer with Russia and its ex-KGB dictator Vladimir Putin than he does with our European allies? Russia has tapes? Something less far-fetched and sleazy?
3
Frankly, European would be well advised to boost spending and plan to defend NATO without the US, because the US is imploding and is absolutely not a reliable partner. Indeed, depending on whether the US remains a stable democracy or becomes a nuclear armed authoritarian regime, the EU should probably be planning on defending itself from Russia AND the US going forward. The EU GDP is considerably bigger than the US and while Europe hit not want to spend 3.5% the way the US does, but a more robust and integrated military would be well advised
5
Why do you think they don’t want to pay for their own defense? It’s because they don’t think it’s worth it. Russia is not the threat it once was, but if the US is stupid enough to keep paying the bills, they figure why not let us?—. It’s all the same to them.
1
Who is it that Trump wants NATO to defend us against? Russia? Just asking.
Lets see--we could replace NATO with an alliance of the following countries: Saudi Arabia and the Emirates (we are already fighting their wars), Egypt, Turkey, the Phillipines, oh, and don't forget Russia. North Korea and China want in? We've got some beautiful deals for you.
2
NATO is a direct threat to Putin, and therefore a threat to Trump. Either that or Trump is so ignorant, he thinks,ethno-nationalism will somehow warn away Russian aggression.
1
Surprised that so many Americans believe that Trump is in Putin's pocket. Well, you have Hollywood.
Russian leaders just generally use "maskirovka", or deception, to cause internal confusion in other countries. Those of you believing on collusion are the real fools of the Russians. They only want to divide the US to make it weaker, and you guys are really doing a good job at helping them.
Written near the Russian border. We have experience.
4
mr. trump is famously ignorant of historical context but this is one exception. he's correct - we are being taken advantage of by europeans who conveniently forget wwI, wwII and of course bailing out the french in indochina back in the day.
how do we explain to our youth and elderly that most of these countries have free or heavily subsidised education and healthcare while we basically help pay for it - but not for our own? diplomacy has gotten us nowhere but deeper in debt, less educated and increasingly unhealthy.
1
"how do we explain to our youth and elderly that most of these countries have free or heavily subsidised [sic.] education and healthcare"? We can say to our youth and elderly that these countries are willing to tax themselves at much higher rates than the US dose to provide for those benefits. To believe that the US subsidizes those services through NATO expenditures is a fantasy.
113
And what if they had to pay the full price for their defense? They’d have to raise their taxes even higher for their welfare state or cut services. Otherwise they’d go broke. They’re just used to taking advantage of the USA as if defense is not really their concern.
2
The EU average public spending is about 45% of GDP. The US sits at 38%. US military spending is 3.5%
Trump's plan for global peace apparently rests on having all governments report to an international kleptocracy.
9
Be careful how you react to this. He actually has a point this time.
2
Is the point that Vlad has some really interesting videos locked up in a safe in the Kremlin?
Just asking, because, that's my takeaway.
3
It would be interesting to know if trump got so upset with NATO ( an acronym he doesn’t even know what it stands for) after a call with his boss in Russia. A row of hotels for leaving nato? What was the bargain?
3
It's about time that the other NATO members pulled their weight. The U.S. cannot be the cash cow for protecting the free world.
3
Putin has the dirt on Trump for year of corrupt Real Estate deals and money laundering and Trump is undermining NATO and our democracy to save his own as*.
Sickening
The reason for NATO was a bulwark against the USSR, and so the WW3 would be fought in Europe and not the U.S.
1
The exchange of things is twofold
- Aristotle
2
If Trump insists on downsizing our military presence in Europe, and he insists on less or no funding for NATO, I hope he's ready to lose the intelligence information we receive from our allies as well.
On numerous occasions Trump has ranted about the lax security in France and Austria and Germany, etc. after terror attacks. What we don't hear is how many attacks have been thwarted due to covert intelligence. What happens when we no longer have access to this covert information?
We are currently being told that refugees from Central America are going to kill us if we allow them the asylum they seek. The threat coming out of Europe, after we leave NATO should scare us more.
7
WHEN will anyone on the Left figure out that Trump is just using a different negotiating strategy to shore up NATO?
I'm guessing: Never.
2
The threat of tariffs was supposed to be just a different negotiating strategy—how’s that working out? He was supposed to make a better Iran deal, a better health care system, a better deal than NAFTA and tpp, but he can’t do it—instead he just breaks up what exists. When will his supporters figure out that he has no negotiating strategy? How many times can you fall for the same scam?
6
Exactly on point, M P.
Slogans without any substance go over great with the MAGA crowd.
Two of the things that protect us are the Atlantic Ocean and the front line soldiers of our allies. There must be some value add to being the first to fight and die to protect us. You can't equate the knowledge of how to cheat someone in real estate to the logistics of defending the free world.
9
Protect us from what? The 16 US aircraft carries (vs Russia's 1 and China's 1) did nothing to stop 911.
US soldiers today are not protecting us.
US military spending created al-Queda and Bin Laden and the 911 attacks on US. Bin Laden was US ally until he turned on US and did to the US what US was paying Bin Laden to do to Russia, India, Middle East.
3
Europe has really been emasculated over the last 12 months. They should take this as a wake up call and stop relying on the U.S so much, because when someone like Trump is elected what happens next? God help them if Russia starts a war because Trump won't be coming to their defense.
4
'God help them if Russia starts a war because Trump won't be coming to their defense." Do you mean the way Obama came to the defense of Crimea, or the gassed Syrians?
3
Europe NATO core alone spends TWICE that of Russia, has more tanks, jets, soldiers than Russia.
Europe can cut military spending by 50% and still equal Russia's military spending.
2
He probably didn't mean it, to answer your question.
My bet is that Europe is waiting this presidency out.
7
BBB, it will be a much longer wait than they think; they, too, read such critical presses that the average European has no idea how popular Trump's policies are in the USA.
3
More than Europe, the world.
Nobody is underestimating the profound damage done by lack of access to education. They know.
3
Curious that at least three posters - Todd in Key West, John in Pittsburgh, and Charles in Charlotte - all use the phrase "blood and treasure" and are critical of US military spending for NATO. Not to suggest, of course, that they are the same person and writing from somewhere else than Key West, Pittsburgh, and Charlotte... but mighty curious, indeed.
14
I myself wouldn’t favor the phrase but you’ll now have to add my lone voice from Hawaii in favor of the sentiment.
I worked at the U.S. Embassy in Brussels (where NATO has its HQ) at the height of the Cold War. Even back then, our NATO allies weren't spending what they made commitments to on their defense. So this is nothing new. The rich countries of Western Europe have always preferred to spend more on social benefits than on defense and let us do more than our fair share (whose defense is it, anyway?). I don't like Trump and don't care for how he does things, but in this case he is right on the issue at least.
4
I think US defense spending contributes to the internal forces breaking it up.
1
Putin engineered the rise of Trump & May, fractured American & UK politics, is nearly rid of Merkel, his agenda is racing along. He is clearly the most powerful leader the world has ever known.
8
We here in the Evil Empire must do for Europe what we did for the Middle East: topple governments, sow confusion, insurrection and chaos. Otherwise, Europe will coalesce around a set of liberal principals benefitting mankind. That would pose a serious threat to the Axis of Idiocy led by Russia and its satellite state, the United States of America. As vassals of Russia, we must make the world safe for plutocracy!
16
You should save your satire for Obama. Trump is only cleaning up after his mess.
1
If the president believes that fellow NATO members are not holding up their end of the bargain, so to speak, then he should bring that up to them diplomatically. Actual diplomacy trumps baseless rhetoric. President Trump’s rhetoric will only hurt the United States’ relationships with its fellow NATO members. NATO is extremely important in maintaining the security of its members (that’s its purpose, after all), and with all of the threats in the world today, we should be nurturing these relationships rather than hindering them. However, the president seems more comfortable nurturing relationships with despots than those with our allies.
6
"Actual diplomacy trumps baseless rhetoric."
Not with Trump supporters.
3
I believe that a majority of people in this country believe that statement to be true though, and those people need to vote this November and beyond to put diplomatic-minded people in power.
1
It would be interesting to know how much our military spending would be if it weren’t for the wat profiteering of our Military Industrial Complex.
I suspect that it is very detrimental to our country.
Everything with Trump is money.
3
In 2006, NATO defense ministers agreed to commit a minimum of two per cent of their gross domestic product to spending on defense, but NATO says only eight of its 29 member states are expected to meet the two-percent guideline in 2018. Meanwhile, the United States is paying 22 percent of NATO expenses.
According to NATO, “Today, the volume of the US defence expenditure effectively represents some 67 per cent of the defence spending of the Alliance as a whole in real terms. This does not mean that the United States covers 67 per cent of the costs involved in the operational running of NATO . . . but it does mean that there is an over-reliance by the Alliance as a whole on the United States for the provision of essential capabilities.”
https://www.nato.int/cps/ie/natohq/topics_67655.htm
3
OR ELSE WHAT? Is the sandbox bully going to pick up his toys and go home?
That is exactly what the ugly bear of a next door bully wants.
7
The Europeans should kick the americans out, and hopefully the rest of the world follows suit. It's time that the united failed states collapsed entirely.
#calexit
3
It's interesting that the failed Calexit movement was headed by an American who has since left for Russia (and plans to seek Russian citizenship). Oddly, some of the Calexit campaign's ground troops had British (Received pronunciation) accents; others had continental European speech, some from far to the east in Europe.
4
Trump, someone who notoriously does not pay his own bills, is lecturing the EU. What a joke. He continues to destroy this country.
13
Yes, the NATO countries should meet their 2% obligation, but to try to bully them by putting doubt about America's commitment is not the way to do it.
3
Or else what? Our allies will abandon us because they're tired of being slapped, and we'll get in bed with Russia? That's the way it looks.
9
Gee, no need for the administration to threaten ... just unleash Wall Street on them and we can distroy their economies like last time.
8
None of this is really surprising. NATO was set up to defend the west -- including the United States -- from Soviet/Russian aggression after World War II. But now -- whether by design or just sheer incompetence -- the Russians effectively have a proxy doing their bidding in the White House. Of course he's doing everything he can to bring the alliance down.
The one good thing which is emerging from this dog's breakfast is the stark realization in what remains of NATO that Trump's America no longer has any interest in defending -- well anything, other than their mutual sense of entitlement. And even if -- in the end -- the US does manage to put its' con-man in chief behind those bars where he so clearly belongs, it has also become painfully clear that no nation capable of putting that man into power can no be trusted to do the right thing. So I guess that -- whatever happens -- Trump will ultimately get "his" way in this.. Time for what remains of the free world to set up a new alliance, sans America. The French, Germans and British will be fine, although I'm not so sure about the former Warsaw Pact countries. Which does raise an interesting question -- in Trumpland, is pulling America out of NATO and putting Russia back in charge of Eastern Europe going to be counted as a "win"?
And is this really what Trumptonians had in mind when they talked about "Make America Great Again"? Because it sure seems more like "Make America Irrelevant. Again."
8
European security is not a problem,Nato expansion is. The US invested 5 billion in the Ukrainian regime change, planning that this vast border nation of Russia would join Nato. And that the Russian naval base in Ukrain, Sebastopol would fall in Nato hands. The immense military budget of the Americans does not serve 'security'. It serves a huge 1000+ number of US military bases world wide that serves US dominance. Which is one the largest threats to security! Trumps request that Europe finances a larger share of US military interests seems out of place.
8
All the Europeans have to do is put up a few million to finance some of Trump's hotels and the problem will go away. This is what happened for Qatar ($600 million plus extorted to finance Kushner properties in NY) or ZTE in China (financing for Trump properties in Indonesia, and previously preferred status for his daughters franchises on N. Korea). In terms of self-dealing, Trump as President is a major crook. Also against the la'aw here, but our Congressmen continue to pretend to know nothing about this (the law). When they go home for the Fourth, instead of town meetings, maybe put them in mock jails to get the point across.
10
These letters are the final notice before the lights are turned off. Trump is serving notice that the old ways of dealing with things since the end of WW II are over. We have learned that our “friends” are friendly only if we keep reaching for the wallet while they sit on their hands. Trump seems to be sensing that Russia and Putin have more uses for us than these deadbeat European freeloaders whose company is now getting a little stale.
1
This is typical Trump:
Gaslight some issue to divert attention from another burning issue.
Bonus points when it’s with polite foreigners who won’t argue with him.
Claim victory somewhere else (NK, Russia, SC...)
Pander to the base.
Repeat.
WAKE UP AMERICA!
10
My guess is Putin likes that most NATO members are not spending enough for their self defense, gives him more room to operate. Probably less than thrilled that Trump is insisting that NATO countries pull their own weight.
2
Don’t you get it? Trump weakens relations with our allies through NAFTA and NATO and pulling our troops out of Germany and putting more troops in Afghanistan- which he quietly is- and has a ‘summit’ with Putin, where is has overtly and covertly been empowering and building a Russia and America alliance. This is his MO! Get used to it....he wants allies like Russia, and others who push for nationalism....understanding perfectly it will - and is weakening the US! We are destroying America as we know it!
11
Hey wait. The main reason we have NATO is for all of us to join together to protect ourselves from the Russians. But President Trump’s one big accomplishment is his kissy-face relationship with the Russians—he’s cozier with his BFF Val than with our best allies. So then how can he argue that we now have to spend MORE money to prepare to take on the Russians? With the way the Russians seem to own him, I wonder if they misbehaved if would even take action.
2
"The United States is proud to bear its share of the defense of the Transatlantic Alliance. It is the cornerstone of our security. But we can't do it alone. And we're going to need to make sure that everybody who is a member of NATO has full membership. They expect full membership when it comes to their defense; then that means that they've also got to make a contribution that is commensurate with full membership.
"President Barack Obama 2014
1
And yet -- somehow -- the blood and treasure which Canada, Britain, France and Germany et al spent in honouring our Article 5 obligations and supporting America's intervention in Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks doesn't find it way onto the books. So very, very convenient.
6
Helping insure Afghanistan would no longer be a safe haven for terrorists was in the interests of many countries. How that has worked out is a different point. Does the U.S. NATO contribution include spending in Afghanistan?
Catherine: German troops are in Afghanistan by Article 5. 9.11 was classified as armed attack as by article 39 and 51 of the UN-Charta. Each country has ratified its own rules of engagement within this charta.
The US is responsible for 70% of the total annual costs of 143 bn annually (the other countries for their share). It sends the majority of soldiers as well.
This is what the Pretend King Trump's base wants a "macho" wanna be guy with hand on the trigger to tell everyone we are the top dog. His base has never understood diplomacy and will continue to cheer him on. As for the rest of us, the majority, if NATO falls as Czar Putin clearly wants, then we will be left with a dangerous mix of European leaders that can initiate aggressive actions towards each other. War equates with profits and the elite has been convinced that so long as there is a War somewhere their pockets will fill with money. Czar Putin 3, USA 0. Are we there yet?
2
Dear NATO allies and friends of the American People:
To be very clear.....Trump does not speak for the people of this country....our country.....not his !!
We, the people of America are/and will continue to be, your loyal and faithful friends....through good and bad times. We have endured a long and lasting relationship over the years, and will do everything in our 'voting power' to preserve that.
In the mean time, please understand that we are, and always will be, the United States of America. Not the United States of Trump.
Keep the faith, and we hope to return to a humane level of friendship, cooperation, understanding, and patience, that has enabled our country and yours to endure on all matters of national security, trade, economics, and trust.
6
And if NATO members decide to spend more money on defense, who will step up to provide the weapons?
The U.S. is the worlds largest arms dealer. We have been arming all sides of every regional dispute in our sphere to a standoff for decades.
A global military build-up is a commercial decision promoted by weapons manufacturers. We need smarter politicians.
5
Share of world arms exports:
USA 34%
Russia 22%
This means that arms exports make up a much greater share of Russia's GDP than the USA's since their economy is much smaller.
These are the two largest arms exporters in the world. We do not supply both sides in every conflict. Examples where this is true are Syria, Crimea/Ukraine, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia.......Facts can be inconvenient things.
We have been arming all sides of every regional dispute in our sphere...
reading comprehension can be inconvenient, too.
Here's a much better idea: get the United States to spend a LOT LESS on defense. Less spending on weapons and war globally would be GREAT for the entire world. In fact, it would be the best news the world has seen in over 100 years.
5
“Mr. Michel reacted tartly last week to the letter, telling reporters at a European Union summit meeting in Brussels that he was “not very impressed” by it, according to a report by Deutsche Welle”
That’s a good one. I’d like to see him come up with that one before the utility company turns off the lights and the gas.
Canada should have no problem leaving NATO and should have no problem - greatly reducing trade with the us - and increasing trade with Mexico and China - in fact entering into trade agreements with those countries - and tightening up their own borders.
4
At what point do we actually sit down as a nation and realize this president is working for Putin? Russia's dream of new world influence is to break the European bonds that oppose it. Trump cannot now be acting without purpose,
7
The excessive military spending on our part is obscene. Seems Cold War II was initiated under the Obama Administration and aided by the MSM. It would be wonderful if the animosity between the US and Russia were to end. And for that issue alone I will hope to give the benefit to Pres. Trump. I would suggest that Russia isn't looking to invade Europe, likely Russia would like to have Europe as a trading partner. Russia surely does not need more land and why would it want Europe's problems anyway? And don't bring up Russia's involvement in Ukraine and Crimea which were reactions to the overthrow of the elected president in Ukraine. If the elected president of Ukraine was allowed to serve out his term then Ukraine would not be divided as it is now.
4
e.s. Naivety is a dangerous weakness. Putin’s policies are transparent ,he wants to restore Russia’s power again. He has manipulated Trump suberbly, Putin’s aim is to destroy NATO or at least weaken that pact, and he wants Trump to lift sanctions. If Trump achieves Putin’s goals, we are sailing into very uneasy & dangerous waters.
2
"Trump Warns NATO Allies to Spend More on Defense, or Else"
We must all be reminded where Trump is coming from. What did NATO ever do for Trump?
Russia? Now that's a different story. Sure they helped get him elected. But he owes them his loyalty more for all the millions or billions they gave him in "real estate deals" over the years when no one else would.
They made him whole when he was down. They Made Trump Great Again. And Donald is all about loyalty.
2
I’m an old timer, if I’ve got 5 years left in this planet I’ll be lucky so I give you this quote from my hero:
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower
9
Suppose that our allies comply, and increase their military spending. Logically, that would be saving for us, and then we can reduce our military spending. Will that ever happen in the right wing atmosphere of Trump regime? Not a chance!
4
No matter what the other NATO members pay or don’t pay on defense, always remember, this is in the US best interests. Simple as that. Trump doesn’t.
2
Increasingly one can determine the location of Trump-branded hotels by the president's foreign policy decisions. Alas, few in Western/Central Europe, man opportunities in Russia and its sphere of influence.
1
Germany, UK, France, Italy spend $185B on military, Russia spends $70B.
Europe could REDUCE its military spending by 50% and still SPEND 50% MORE than Russia.
US could cut its military budget by 50% (just our $800B Pentagon budget not our entire $1.2T military budget) and spend TWICE as much as Russia ($70B) and China ($250B) COMBINED.
US military spending is at the level of an offensive war making state and that is what we are with 200 military bases (Russia and China have 3 combined) and US troops waging war on people all over the world, killing thousands daily with our drone strikes and other offensive military operations to secure Middle Ease oil supplies.
8
It's not how much you spend, it's how you spend it. And while we know that a good portion of military spending is wasteful, congress just keeps giving them more..
3
I think the European countries should increase spending on NATO forthwith out of their own interest because it is clear Trump is a very combative person and if he is provoked, he will not refrain from bombing those countries.
And we know how to do it: we did it in Iraq and won easily. In Syria: well, it is probably half cooked. But we are doing pretty well in Yemen, albeit with Saudi help.
So, don't under-estimate the US/Trump. We know how to start a war and know how to win. And now that we don't have to use our nukes on NK, we have those available too for use in Europe.
And, so, Germany, France, Italy, et al: listen up. Don't provoke Trump, please. Please do as he says. And you will be spared.
Are you aware that children are being systematically starved in Yemen by Saudis with help from the USA?
3
Do we really want the country that builds Porsche's and Mercedes Benz to produce military hardware? If they did what could the US actually export that dictators would actually buy?
8
This smells a lot more like Trump carrying out Putin's orders than concern for allies paying their fair share. If Trump wants to confront anyone, why not confront Putin for meddling in our elections?
7
I see nothing wrong with asking our European allies to share the burden of the defense of the civilized western world. Russian and China pose a threat to the Western way of life, whether one lives in the UK, Spain, Germany or the USA.
Those people here who complain about Mr. Trump's demands on the Europeans are the same people who complain that the US spends too much on the military and not enough on education.
Sure, we can have our cake and eat it too, but there is our children's future to consider.
1
I detest our president. I loathe Vladimir Putin. I voted for Trump's main opponent (the other two alternatives were more unqualified than he was). I also studied in Europe for several years and must agree that the US is taken for granted there, just as in Canada, with outright smugness and derision. Yet we still take charge of their security. This was justified in Europe in the years right after World War II. But almost immediately, western Europe enjoyed what the French call "les trente glorieuses" -- the 30 "glorious years" of economic prosperity.
Today many of the NATO partners are just as wealthy as the United States. (America's mega-corporations and superrich skew GDP figures. We are a poorer country.) Germany, France, Canada, and other rich NATO partners must pull their own weight. And many, if not most, Germans (not just the "Ossis," or easterners) desire sharp reductions in the US military presence on their territory. It might be time.
2
I won't speak for other nations, but here in Canada we have been pulling our weight -- for over 100 years. Where was America in 1940? Or 1916, for that matter? Who paid those bills? The real problem here -- at least from Trump's perspective -- is not what the rest of the world hasn't been spending on defence. The real problem is that the rest of the world doesn't share America's conveniently short memory.
9
@Curious. There are thousands of U.S soldiers' graves in France and Belgium, from both wars. As for "bills," I'd say those were paid. The Marshall Fund was unprecedented in world history. You are dead wrong to conflate 20th-century U.S. isolationist sentiment in key electoral states with U.S. non-participation in the world wars. The latter didn't happen.
Trump forgets that the NATO countries have given back to the US, with special trade agreements ,access to land for military purposes,diplomatic friendships, exchange of intelligence etc. Trump has placed all these concessions under threat, it would be easy to come to the conclusion that these attack’s on our NATO allies is to appease Putin. The question is .....Why?
8
In commerce, the bill for security is baked in to the cost of doing business, feigning ignorance doesn't work. NATO has obligations and many past due bills to settle with the United States. Too long has the conspiracy of ignorance been allowed to go on unchecked. That's what I like about Trump, he doesn't pretend to know about Chess and the long game, but he is good at checkers where the strategy is to put a block on your opponent..
In political theory, the simplest ‘working’ definition of fascism involves government by ultimatum. When “or else” becomes the alternative option to uncompromising demands, it is no longer possible to deny that fascism is nascent.
5
These types of conversations and threats should be made, if at all, in private. But Trump can't go through a day without 'playing the victim' publicly and throwing more red meat at his base. After WWII, NATO members did not want Germany to build up a massive military. The US spends proportionally more money on its military by orders of magnitude, compared to any other nation. And its not in the least 'cost-effective'. More and more nuclear arms that ensure the extermination of the planet many times over, does nothing to increase security. Neither does the bureaucracy of a bloated military that has 'Mil-Specs' for every item down to a hammer - resulting in their paying ten times the market cost for ordinary items. Money spent does not equal 'effectiveness. The defence of Europe needs to be measured by the number of troops on the ground and the military arms in place. Not by wasteful expenditures at home.
3
There is a concept known as "dumbing up" which states that the higher you go in an organization, the less the people know about the actual culture of the organization. Who can tell you more, for instance, about the culture of a workplace, the mail room clerk or the CEO?
Trump exemplifies this truth almost perfectly. The richest country on the planet -- heck the richest country in history -- is being cheated by its allies? If the cheating is so bad, how did we get so rich?
Trump's "victim-y" take on everything in his world is on display here, dove-tailed with his lack of knowledge of how things really are below him and down to the bottom of the food chain.
America's spending problem is the military-industrial complex which is 95% corporate welfare wasteful spending by the federal government.
This is why we can't have nice things: health care for all, bridges that don't collapse, schools that are the envy of the world, a national passenger high-speed rail system, secondary education for young people that desire it and qualify, a jobs and retraining program for the "losers" in the fall-out of NAFTA-type restructuring, child care for lower income workers, social security that is actually security for seniors instead of poverty-level income for people whose investment gains were gobbled up by Wall Street, etc., etc.
8
Trump declared NATO obsolete, "not knowing much about NATO, now I know a lot about NATO".
A year on, this well-informed fast learner "expressed surprise that 35,000 active-duty troops are stationed" in Germany ...
Still not to worry -- I'm sure by now he's spent the necessary "hour and a half to learn everything there is to know about missiles," and he has assured us that "I know a lot about planes." Such a clever boy.
8
Commander-in-Chief Bone Spur leads the fight - for money.
2
“Such a result could play into the hands of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia ... whose primary goal is sowing divisions within the alliance.”
Do you have a source for this assertion? Mr. Putin likely has many goals but has he stated this to be the primary one?
2
Putin has also stated that Russia had nothing whatsoever to do with interference in the US election, whom do you believe, your own country’s intelligence agencies or Putin?
Putin is unlikely to reveal openly what his real aims are, he is a Machiavellian politician, with decades of Russian intelligence background experiences.He is a master manipulator, and Trump is he star puppet.
5
Doesn’t Trump understand that if you 1. Want to reduce your defense spending, and 2. Therefore rely on your allies’ forces to protect your interests, you must 3. Keep those alliances strong? It seems pretty obvious. Also, so few people seem to remember, but the countries of Western Europe were in ruins after WWII. It was in the interest of all that rebuilding take precedence over weapons development. I lived in Europe in the 1970s, and the after effects of the war were still apparent even then. Europe has grown since then in wealth, power, and organization, and some adjustments are probably in order, but confrontation like Trump’s is destructive and offensive. And to accuse NATO of having blood on it’s hands re our wars of choice is ridiculous.
4
The military industrial complex in the United States stands to benefit enormously from any increased spending by NATO allies (buy our pretty planes, please!). And if our brothers in arms resist Trump's thinly-veiled sales pitch, who stands to benefit by the seeds of division sown by our dubious leader? Comrade Putin, of course. Trump must arrive at their little summit in Putin's good graces to avoid damaging what little bromance that remains in his life.
3
Please don't call me European. I am British.
We are asked to spend 2% of our GDP for NATO but I understand we spend 3%.
Have a look at HMS Queen Elizabeth. What a beauty and what a crew.
Always by your side USA.
2
Once again, this is nothing about NATO, but about Trump needing to pick a fight with someone to garner more attention for himself. Everything is about Trump. Besides, he knows absolutely nothing about anyone or anything he picks fights with. Being a raging narcissist, he lacks all intellectual capacity to understand even the fundamentals.
Good for the Dutch. We more leaders contradicting him in public.
6
Europe and Canada have been for 70 years loyal to the US demonstrating support and cooperation in any field.
Trump's negative attitude toward trusted allies is at best incomprehensible unless Russia is behind all this chaos. If this is true then Putin has Trump in the bag.
4
It goes both ways though doesn't it. For 70 years the US has been loyal to Europe and Canada demonstrating support and cooperation in any field.
1
To Eric:
Yes, obviously it goes both ways. But now America is suddenly breaking that alliance and you are supporting the absurd and suspicious alliance with the Kremlin.
2
The common thread uniting Trump's foreign and domestic policy is an appeal to his base constituency's resentments, anxieties, and xenophobia. At home, Trump's base is constantly told, some one--liberal elites, women, citizens of color, Muslims, refugees and immigrants--someone is "treating us badly."
Internationally, in trade it used to be Japan, then China, and later NAFTA. Now the EU and the WTO. Poor floundering, persecuted, mistreated America. The richest and most powerful country in the world. Some one is always taking advantage of Trump's base. Talk about the political power of portraying oneself as the victim!
Now it's carried over into defense policy. NATO is as bad as NAFTA. Poor mistreated America. The entire post-World War II global trade and political order, built largely by the United States, one administration after another, to enhance American security and prosperity, is now under attack, and subverted by an American president whose own resentments and sense of inadequacy and anxiety match those of his political base.
In a time of anxiety and uncertainty--even if that is to a significant degree self-created--portraying a people as victim can render an enormous political pay-out. Call it the power of whine. That is something Trump--the eternal outsider--viscerally senses.
But we have seen this pattern before. Weimar Germany anyone?
5
Seems to me our “so-called” president really doesn’t have a foreign policy? My question is “WHO” behind the scenes is pushing this baffoon in this direction. You have to be a certified knucklehead not to realize the importance of NATO.
6
Happy 4th of July everyone!
(Well, it's 4 July here now).
It's also the 100th anniversary of the first time U.S. troops were engaged in their first real big push in WW1 in France, at Le Hamel.
Fortunately, the battle commander of that action, the foremost Australian general of WW1 General John Monash, didn't share Trump's apparent disdain of having U.S. troops fighting and training with troops of another country's army.
Monash was by then refining his blitzkreig battle tactics which aimed at getting a maximum advance for minimal casualties, with air support, as opposed to the previous tactics of mass unsupported charges at the enemy.
He knew that the doughboys needed experience in battle, and who better to train them but seasoned Australian troops?
General Pershing however almost wrecked this plan as he objected to having American troops led by a "foreign" general (and Monash was not only Australian but also of German Jewish background).
Monash however decided that Pershings request to withdraw the U.S. troops needed "clarification", which would take some time!
The highly planned attack on the German lines at Le Hamel was a brilliant success; Monash had planned the action to be over in 90 minutes. It took 93 minutes and achieved all objectives.
It gave the U.S. soldiers valuable life-saving experience and showed the dividends of allies co-operating. None of this nonsense of saying "you fight your own battles and we'll fight ours", which is what Trump's attitude seems to be.
7
Trump continues to push Putin's agenda of weakening the western alliances.
5
Here is some speculation on the situation.
Putin has nothing on Trump. They are both deploying the same tactics. Their plan is to unify the world on their terms.
In Russia, Putin has already consolidated his power. In the US, Trump has some catching up to do. Once he succeeds though, he will align himself with Russia and take over Europe, by force if necessary.
He is using tariffs and social issues to disrupt and weaken free nations and China so eventually he and Putin can take them over too.
1
So Trump the evil genius is planning the take over of the earth? Are you sure he is not ment on total destruction of the earth?
The NATO allies basically telling the U.S that it needs to spend less money on defense and more money on health and education of U.S. citizens. But, that is against the policies of the Republicans. The NATO allies are afraid to say because that may expose them to the criticism of interfering in domestic politics. So, they are quietly applying the principle of passive aggression by not cooperating with the U.S. After mid-term elections, he needs more than his base to get re-elected, so he will change the tone and style. The second term will be focused on how to cash the office of the presidency.
2
PROTEST.....RESIST....VOTE. We need to take this country back and restore our allies’ faith in the US.
5
How inclusive! He's so friendly. Such a breath of dead air, actually. This history repeating itself, going all the way back to WWI, WWII with Harry Truman stealing the presidency after FDR died. They had only met in person twice (!) when he was muscled in (by the Mob, Unions, etc.) to the VP ticket at the last second before FDR was elected his 4th time. Wallace was the person everyone wanted. Truman, who dropped the atom bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, when all but a single 5 star generals (6 out of 7) said NOT to drop it, as Japan was ready to surrender BEFORE the bomb. Truman was the lowest rated president in history when he left office, up until George W. Bush (and co-conspirator Dick Cheney) left office. He was illegally given his presidency by The Supreme Court in 2000 (remember the hanging chads in Florida?). Now Trump is isolating the US worse than all of them put together; In doing so, he is altering the World Order drastically. For most of our (former) allies in Europe, it's become the "either you're with me or you're against me" syndrome with Trump. He is killing us. We are not the world leader we so aspired to be anymore. This is the worst part of Trump and the consequences of what has occurred as a result of his ignorant child like decisions.
1
Of course Bone Spurs wants NATO countries to increase their military spending. Here in the Great Again land of Freedumb, this approach actually saves money. That's right! Save several hundred million. Several hundred million! And how to get this yuge savings? Very easy. Step 1: Gut the State Department (all those diplomats do is talk). Step 2: Dump another cool hundred billion on into the military. Yuge parades. And support our troops! (Cause we're gonna need more of them.)
4
This guy singlehandedly wants to micromanage the entire free world
6
Trump doesn’t actually want the other members to pony up more spending he just wants to get rid of it all together. This is just a weak ploy. What a monster.
9
Trump is blind to other measures of success but money. He is a fool.
6
Obama and Bush complained of Europe’s failure to match spending goals. Mattis and Gates seem rankled by it too. There is plainly an issue; I wish European allies would adjust their behavior to remedy it.
That said, I worry about the damage Trump’s assault on our freedom loving allies might cause. And I worry about how his supporters might begin to adopt anti-western views as a consequence. All of this is to say: yes, there is a problem, but this is not the solution. I suppose you could say the same thing about immigration, North Korea, and on and on.
2
Trump is right that Europe needs to bolster its defense. Previous administrations let them off the hook, and that was unwise (cue the sharpening of knives by progressives for saying anything positive about Trump).
Now he has to be equally uncompromising towards the authoritarian governments he makes no secret of admiring.
danschorr.blogspot.com
Brooklyn Teacher, I think “progressives” are more concerned about how Trump is going about his policy.Obama was also concerned about the NATO cost, but he wasn’t about to destroy allies and bolster Russia’s power in Europe to save some money.Destroying or weakening the NATO pact by cutting out US military involvement has consequences for the US and the world beyond a cost saving policy. Those consequences are frightening if we not only withdraw our presence in Europe but also alienate our long term allies/partners. Together with Trump’s Trade policies and his unhealthy and dangerous relationship with Putin, is the recipe for future discord and instability that will effect Europe and the US.
3
I sense a bigger play at work here; I think Trump senses Merkel's weakness, and that he's going to try to tie the migration struggles in the EU to the migration struggles that we're having here.
The argument might run like this; "why is the U.S. housing soldiers in the EU when we have national and border security issues of our own to deal with? The EU has already relied on the US to bring peace to the Balkans, help Turkey maintain border security by supporting the Syrian Rebels and keeping Assad somewhat contained, and by helping to fend off Russian aggression in the Baltic and contain their aggression to the Crimea and the Ukraine. So why should we do more? Furthermore, why not bring our soldiers home, so they can protect our borders? We're being overrun too!"
While this may sound like a crazy argument - especially to woke activists like me who want open borders in Europe and here in the US - many who aren't so plugged in are going to hear this argument and then see news of people in Europe in rejecting open borders, and the two issues will reinforce one another.
Basically, it's the grand unifying force of America First at work. Whether it's border control, low taxes, trade wars, or NATO - all of his actions always point back to America First. We on the left need something just as unifying, and just as logically coherent. I'v tried "Shame, Shame on America!" and "Invade the World, Invite the World" but these lack the same punch of America First. We need a brand!
Suggest you woke-up and stop saying / writing / thinking "open borders". It sounds nonsensical and nothing meaningful is conveyed.
US borders get and should be patrolled, but MAYBE Trump's outrageous crackdowns should be directed solely upon employers for a while.
This nation needs to root out Trump's enablers. "Vote out Republicans on 6 November 2018." That's the brand.
3
Anyone else find it amusing that Don the Con is complaining about countries not paying what, he believes, they owe? Didn't this deadbeat in the Oval Office make a career of not paying vendors? Of course his businesses filed for bankruptcy, six times, so yeah, let's trust his business acumen.
Or perhaps, the best haircut in DC, is channeling his former business associate, Fat Tony Salerno. He of the 'pay up or else' school of negotiation. Either way it's not what they teach at Wharton.
5
As President Trump knows alliances can change in a heartbeat. Russia can help us with Chemical weapons one day and drop them the next.
When we are seeing countries like Austria, Hungary, Poland and the USA move toward hard right wing governments with little respect for the law and checks and balances the less spending on the military the better.
The sad fact about the US military is about 65% of it is private contractors. They can be hired out and are hired out by despots across the globe right now.
The US protection racquet that our President is trying to sell has created a refugee crisis that is destroying Europe. I don't want the Europe that's being created with a military one bit bigger. I would love to see militaries across the globe shrink, including our own.
The Don is like a mob boss trying to sell protection for not killing you.
5
The unfortunate reality is that Trump is correct, as were all previous presidents about NATO nations abject failure to meet agreed upon funding. NATO, itself, acknowledges this problem.
With all of the trouble Trump-Pence team is causing in Europe, and the overall good condition of the NATO nation economies, a rational person would expect the NATO members to immediately cease their excuses (i.e. including rental value of land to US bases despite such calculation was never agreed upon) and pay up. Germany, especially, with a federal surplus that is growing has absolutely no fiscal excuse for failing to meet her obligation.
The longer NATO nations persist, the more they will lose bargaining power against the idiotic duo Trump-Pence.
2
The Allies - which are no longer Allies of the US if Trump is alive - should tell the maniac to get lost, they'll go it on their own. And while they are at it - they should ban Americans from travel to their countries.
Do that and see how long Trump sticks around.
10
This is the long game played by Putin; he clearly has some leverage over Trump (and/or enticement via financing for the Trump business empire). After complaining long enough bout Europe's defense financing Trump will have his excuse to give Putin what he wants - comprehensive power over Eastern Europe and an ability to push Western Europe around - after the US pulls out of NATO.
Of course, if war comes again to Europe, our allies will pay far more than a few percent of their economies to fight it - as their land will be the battlefield, while the US sits on its backsides (i.e., "America First").
1
Why is any rational man "warning" our allies that we will attack them? He's nuts. He's deconstructing everything and pulling his head back into his shell, withdrawing on most if not all of our significant trade and environmental agreements. Who is this guy and how did he get this job????
4
I don't think he's warning that we will attack them. We won't attack our allies; not even Trump is that stupid. I think he is warning that we will remove our defense from them, exposing them to attack from others potentially.
1
Another misleading headline from the NYT.
The article states that, "The president’s complaint is that many NATO allies are not living up to the commitment they made at their Wales summit meeting in 2014 to spend 2 percent of their gross domestic product on national defense. "
I guess the NYT believes that asking a country to live up to a promise is bullying.
In and of itself, maybe not. Obama did something similar.
But put in context of all the other childish idiocy which Trump has imposed upon America's soon-to-be former allies, and in the manner in which the "complaint" was made public, and yeah, it qualifies as bullying. Grown-ups know the difference.
The bully keeps trying the same strategy, but his threats are seemingly falling on deaf ears. He is the impotent old man he appears to be and everyone knows it. Too bad, it took over a year for them to figure it out.
1
The barbarian tells the civilized world be as brutish as I am or else... Let's hope the civilized world has the courage to stand up to ignorance.
5
This person is a paid foreign agent. He is dedicated to the destruction of the United States and the eradication of the Western alliance. He is now committing treason in plain sight. He must be removed from office.
6
I am so sick and tired of America's obsession with militarism.
And it is getting worse.
The establishment parties in America are either aligned with military circles like the case with the Republican party or using the Democratic Party to batten down the hatches with military intelligence and the CIA to ensure the status quo. The elites of both reactionary parties know full well that under the conditions of heightened social inequality the masses would inevitably take a political action at some point in future, and that is precisely why they are now joining forces with the elements linked to the Military Industrial Complex as a sort of last line of defense for them.
Mainstream media news where 'retired' CIA agents are now regularly hired as consultants (Brennan, Clapper, Hayden etc.) continue to propagandized an already dumbed down American electorate.
You know that you're NO longer living in a democracy when there's No public knowledge about military operations conducted in over 70% of the planet, and there's NO public debate or plebiscite about how most of your tax dollars are spent. The military/security/surveillance corporate state controls all the politicians and determines all policies.
It's bad enough that the US is addicted to ruthless militarism, a totalitarian culture and has lost any moral compass (Gina Haspel!), but Europe paid dearly for that same kind of ignorance and stupidity not too long ago.
Europe's future is not militarism but diplomacy and cooperation.
5
Who benefits from a weakened NATO? Russia. Hillary was right, he is a Putin's Puppet.
9
As always Trump is a bully who never seems to consider the view point of others.
1
Why is everyone avoiding the obvious truth here? Mr. Trump is the most effective ally Vladimir Putin has ever discovered. Russia's goal since the end of World War II has been to undermine and weaken the western alliance, principally NATO. Until the advent of this President, the Russians had little success. Now, our President is dismantling NATO while we watch and having a trade war with the same allies. Putin must be thrilled. Just keep in mind that the next time we attempt to assemble a grand coalition to block
Russia's greedy expansion westward, our former allies'
phones might ring without response. Wake up! This is dangerous and stupid.
7
Maybe not so dumb. Western Europe doesn't really need American help anymore vis-a-vis the Russians. France and Germany are more than capable of handling what remains of the former Red Army. The Russians know that.
And with the two new Queen Elizabeth class carriers, the Royal Navy can easily blow their Russian counterparts out of the water anywhere outside of the Baltic or Black Seas. The Russians know that too. But France, Britain and Germany aren't the real targets here. Putin's real goal is to re-establish Russian control over Ukraine, Poland and maybe the Baltic States. And breaking up the US-centered alliance which currently keeps him from doing that is a very sensible first step.
42
"Just keep in mind that the next time we attempt to assemble a grand coalition to block
Russia's greedy expansion westward, our former allies'
phones might ring without response"
This is dumb. European allies wouldn't accept aid from the U.S. if we offered it to them on the heels of a Russian invasion? Really?
Two "jump carriers" are not a strategic threat to what the Russians can do to Eastern Europe. That is absurd reductionist bragging. If your country faces a potential existential threat from the East, you would not be so sanguine. What Trump is doing is the perfect Manchurian Candidate scenario that will have deep and serious repercussions long after he is gone.
"Continued German underspending on defense undermines the security of the alliance"
Yes, the fake president is completely clueless when it comes to history, especially the history of post-WWII Europe and NATO. What else would one expect from this dummkopf?
It's beyond clear the traitor is doing all he can to fulfill his obligations and debts to pooty, especially after his shameful statements at the G7, saying russia should be in that group.
And now he continues, in what is a prelude to another embarrassing "performance" at the NATO meeting, followed, we can be sure, by an equally disgusting display of hero worship for his dictator boss, in Helsinki. Pooty is certainly getting his money's worth. That pee tape must be golden.
3
Trump should shut up and pull out of NATO and Europe should call his bluff,he will fold in a second.
3
Trump should stop blackmailing our allies.
4
Our priorities have changed with the “ Citizen’s United” ruling, it’s become corporations united with a little bit of Evangelical and White Supremists mixed in, for good flavor..in the meantime you need money for all this beast, so let’s try to get it from our allies who have nothing to do with our irresponsibility to begin with!
4
Is trump really working for Putin?? Please hurry mr mueller.
5
What an idiot! Is he trying to start WW 3, when are the newspapers going to be more critical of where this could lead? We have had these alliances for almost a Century, we have obviously benefitted from being the provider and watchdog of this security..make no doubt Russia is playing Trump and his administration like the fools they are! Putin obviously has some huge pile of dirt on him and now wants his ransom! Hello and when is it acceptable in our democratic nation to “admire” the authoritarians of the world over the peace seeking nations. Trump makes me sick for all of our children and the world! Tomorrow is our annual 4th of July celebration and why are we celebrating, when this one man is allowed to tear it all to shreds!!
6
45s version of winning is the rest of the world losing. Eisenhower warned us about the military industrial complex and it is biting the world in the butt right now under our Idiot in Chief. Millions of people are starving to death in the world because of War. Our military doesn't help stop the dying it only makes it worse.
WAR. What is it good for? Absolutely Nothing!
4
Seems like he's looking for more customers for arms sales. If we're not directly providing security, other countries will have to buy more arms and munitions. Guess who will benefit?
The nincompoop in the White House is continuing his self-dealing, aided and abetted by the Republican Congress.
Another win for Putin....so much winning!!!
2
Pull our troops out of Germany. They don't need us. Let them defend themselves. They have the money. They just don't want to spend anything on their military. Let their Migrants fight for Germany. I am sick of seeing Angela Merkel in our newspapers day after day.
Chris
Do you want forward defenses, of keep everything back on
U.S soil. Keep in mind that these bases give us extra added mobility, not just in Europe but also in the middle East.
What was the saying, do you want to fight them there or here...
These bases give us the opportunity to fight them there.
It is well worth the cost.
The military folks will balk at this for defensive reasons. And they should.
2
The GDP in the netherlands is € 825 bln. We cant spend that as a goverment. We only have ¤ 170 bln in taxes to spend . Apart form that the government also collects 110 bln in premiums for healthcare, basic pensions en social security. The premiums are not doesnt cover all the cost for healthcare and social securities. Those deparments have a budget of 80 bln each. This gives us the opportunity to let people buy helhcare insurance for € 1000 a year, and we can garantee a social minimum fo € 1000 per month for each household: long term unemplyed, disabled and refrugees. For education we need € 35 bln, so everybody can get an education. Then we need defence € 8.5 bln, infrstructure (roads an dykes) 8,5 bln and justice 10.5 bln. We dont have much left, but 8,5 bln is about 1.2% of our GDP. WE increase our budget with an extra 1 bln. That is easy because we have a 8 bln surplus on our buget.
And back in Moscow, Vladimir Putin is chuckling in satisfaction. His little asset is performing SO WELL.
5
Or else, we declare war on our NATO allies?
Blow-hard Donald. Blow very really hard. You underestimate the EU, house of bricks. You'll become Trump soup! Does Trump really think he can defend American interests with just the American weapons of mass destruction?
2
The Trump administration has already reportedly been analyzing a large-scale withdrawal of American forces from Germany, after Mr. Trump expressed surprise that 35,000 active-duty troops are stationed there and complained that NATO countries were not contributing enough to the alliance.
---What.an.idiot. What a buffoon. What a fool. At 70+ years of age and after 1.5 years as president, being briefed on everything about the military, he's 'surprised' about U.S. presence in Germany???
"...while American soldiers continue to sacrifice their lives overseas or come home gravely wounded"
---These are either conflicts in which we and our allies have equal interests in or conflicts that WE, the UNITED STATES, started and that these allies have been gracious enough to help with
7
"These are either conflicts in which we and our allies have equal interests in or conflicts that WE, the UNITED STATES, started and that these allies have been gracious enough to help with" If that's truly your take, don't you believe we should end these conflicts?
2
Maxine Waters is right to push back against Trump. Fight back against Trump now; or; you may never be able to when he gags free speech. Grow a pair and fight back. Ray Sipe
4
Let's put this in perspective. In the U.S. we have the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense. DHS really has the mission of defending our borders, while the Pentagon is primarily built to operate overseas and exercises its power on offense.
Our NATO allies do not share our appetite for foreign intervention. We have no business carrying out as many offensive initiatives as we do. If Trump wanted to cut our budget on offense he could, yet he worked with Congress to sign a $80 billion increase for FY 2018 instead. Our priorities are completely screwed up, and Trump doesn't really want to cut offensive spending anyway. It's too popular with his minority of supporters.
5
It's the United States that is over-spending, not European nations under-spending. The world hardly needs to be on more of a war footing.
5
How does Trump work? Simply put: he meets the leader of a country, being polite - all the while studying how that leader operates. Trump then finds their weakness - and attacks until Trump gets his way. If he doesn't get his way, he'll keep attacking until he does get his way.
And this from the man who calls himself the great negotiator. Yeah - of many failed real estate deals. Just ask any of his unemployed staff from the Taj Mahal Casino - they'll tell you how he actually operates a business.
2
I have to say that Trump is basically correct on this issue. In this case Trump is saying something that needs to be said to make NATO stronger. Although European leaders don't want to hear it they shouldn't unfairly assert that Trump's criticism is his attempt to damage NATO. Many of the European countries have spent less than the 2% of GDP on defense and there is not a trend of greater spending since their 2014 Wales commitment to increase spending to the 2% level by 2024. For once Bolton is on target when stating that if European NATO countries are concerned about a Russian military threat they would increase defense spending to the recommended level. At the same time however Trump asserting that he expended political capital to increase US defense spending is poppycock. Even if the USA reduced its military presence in Europe overall defense spending would not decrease since that in direct conflict with Trump and the republican policies.
1
Don't you think it very strange that a U.S. President would be more deferential to Russia (Putin) than to our long-term NATO allies?...How can anyone trust this president to act in our best interests when his primary concern is with how Putin will perceive or interpret his moves as opposed to those nations who stood shoulder to shoulder with us during our most challenging times?
I don't trust Trump, and neither should you. It is established fact that Putin paid a pivotal role in getting him elected through their brazen interference in our electoral process. If anything, Russia should have been punished severely for their action. Instead, one of Trump's first actions after being "selected" as our next president was to lift the sanctions that were initially applied against Russia as punishment for their interference.
And as we're about to face the midterm elections, what actions have our legislators, and Trump, taken to prevent a reoccurrence of Russia's interference?...Nothing that I know of. We should use paper ballots instead of electronics. And we should have monitors from both parties at each location to ensure that no foul play takes place.
...Again, these are very strange times. We all need to be on alert -- especially those who we elected to represent our interests -- to prevent a reoccurrence. As far as I'm concerned, I don't regard Trump as our legitimate leader. In fact, it has been proven that he wouldn't have won the election had the election been fair.
3
Mr. Trump should consider that the neoconservatives will never have a military power large enough to suit them. They love to project that power all over the world and they need military bases in other countries to accomplish that. If he removes more of those bases it will be that much harder to project power.
That would be a very good thing to happen.
1
Yes, Canada and western Europe should make an agreement to revitalize their defense industries and buy all weapons and equipment from each other. Of course, it will take a bit of time to build the factories and train the workers but this all counts for spending. Just don't but anything from the US industrial military complex. After all, nation security you guys!
1
I feel like I've been in an upside-down world ever since election results showed that tens of millions of Americans bought what Trump was 'selling': racial division, isolationism, the celebration of ignorance, misogyny, anti-democratic impulses--the list of disgraceful messages and qualities is practically endless. But, for all his blustering about NATO countries 'owing us' money, I never imagined that Trump would, seemingly deliberately, go about breaking every tie we have with trusted and strategically and economically valuable allies who've stood beside us for 70 years and longer.
Where will this end? Will we be left with North Korea, China and Russia (and perhaps Duerte, for good measure) as our 'friends'? All of their leaders could hoodwink our president with both hands tied behind their backs! How much more can our country take, being rent to pieces on the inside and isolated from all sources of external help should we need it...
2
I think Trump is right in saying NATO is outmoded. It has been a success story and has reached its goal, time to move on. The common threat that created NATO, the Soviet Union, has morphed into just plain Russia, a nation state just like the other European states. Europe has recovered from world war II, in part thanks to the Marshall plan. Europe should now pay for its own defense and end its dependency on the USA. At least then it wont have to invite Trump to meeiings.
Trump's a Deal Breaker, not a Deal Maker. The U.S. willingly joined with 12 nations in 1949 to protect each other from attack... now there are 29, all European.
Historically, the U.S. has wanted to maintain a strong worldwide military presence, to protect their own interests
So now Trump wants to take his boats and go home? Or will they be used to protect China's takeover of the South China Sea,
currently an open trade zone?
Escort oil tankers from Russia? Block trade routes? Attack Europe from the West while Russia attacks from the East?
Worried taxpayers should know that Congress refuses to slash defense spending, and that overall, the U.S. spends little on NATO.
The bulk of U.S. military spending is in secret "special ops" in the Middle East, run not by the military, but by hired privateers, like Blackwater.
Since Trump's allegiance is to an aggressive Russia, and not to Europe, it would be wise if the U.S. left NATO.
The other 28 countries must build their armies and drill. Buy weapons from France and Germany. Form alliances in Africa.
Trump has an itchy trigger finger. His unstable America is no more a safe harbor or bastion of democratic belief. Turn to Europe, Canada or Mexico for that.
And let him cut and run. As usual.
4
This will surely upset members of both parties. The left loves to prop up socialist nations...and if they have to spend more on defense they clearly can't survive. The right constantly loves to promote the military as a strong stance against Russian aggression in Europe. Bottom line...Europe is not paying their fare share...and it's time they do. Yes, we want a strong NATO alliance, but all countries have to pay up. We want these old world orders to move forward...and some are good, like NATO...but the USA can no longer foot the bill alone. We need help. I'm not entirely sure why this is bad. 2% of GDP by all nations means they pay different amounts, but that is a fair equity.
1
trump just doesn't think like a real leader would. He focuses on the petty things and seems incapable of looking ahead or even comparing pros and cons. This article is testimony to his shortcomings.
2
Music to Putin's ears. Those two love birds will have plenty of happy chirping to do later this month. Expect a renewed offensive against Ukraine's government in August.
4
If Trump wants out of NATO, he should just do it. Then he can find out how valuable allies are when he wants to go to war with Iran and North Korea.
1
Deja Vue
In March 2016, President Obama warned he UK that the “special relationship” would be at risk unless the UK would increase defence spending to 2%.
Her termed the allies "free riders".
A not so polite terms, and warning that the relationship would come to an end
What exactly, is new ?
2
Trump does not believe in relations based upon mutual benefits but on relations based upon the ability to enforce ones will so that others pay up when payment is due. It’s a good way to find oneself alone and facing a foe with former allies who have joined that foe.
1
British are on a way to meet the mark by 2024.
Defence spending is the most efficient method for transferring public funds to private pockets so I am sure Mr President would love to see more orders flow from the military worldwide.
1
One would think that the self-professed king of debt would understand how debts are actually incurred.
1
As a Canadian, I think we should be doing more in this area, but while we’re on the topic of weapons and defence, we’d like you to turn your bluster onto gun manufacturers. Readily available guns are increasingly finding their way into Canada from the US. Do something about it and we’ll gladly do our part.
3
Thank you for the correction of Mark Rutte being prime minister of the Netherlands and not of Denmark. Are you sure?
And are you sure that Donald Trump is president of the United States of America?
There is so much fake news nowadays, and also so much unbelievable stuff. At my age, it is becoming harder and harder to distinguish them.
Fortunately, the omnipresent trolls are easy to spot.
2
I thought for a second of who was the biggest threat to our security and well being and only the USA threatens our past, present and future.
I was asked the other day who I trust more you President or Kim Jung Un and the answer is why do I have to trust either but your President is the existential economic and military threat.
Here in Canada we have heads of government and heads of state. We are a liberal democracy and when we go to the polls we choose to go either left or right and our democracy has only one impediment an economic superpower that has but one economic philosophy neoliberalism.
The three biggest military threats are all neoliberal economies Russia, China and the USA. The two biggest economic threats are the USA and China with Russia having an economy smaller than Italy's.
Nato proved useless when Putin annexed Crimea and Nato proved comfortable when the USA was stable and rum by professionals having the USA as our foundation when it is in the hands of incompetent intellectually challenged would be tyrants is not reassuring.
In 2014 our Minister of Foreign Affairs; Chrystia Freeland published Plutocrats: The Rise of the Global Super Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else. It was a NYT best seller and explains where Canada and the rest of the Western democratic world is in 2018. Your President is doing an excellent job in showing us a USA led Nato is not a security blanket even as it is woven asbestos..
1
Trump's lack of geopolitical understanding is beyond ridicule. He has two career generals in his cabinet, has had two others; and has the State Dept, the DoD and the intelligence community to support him. Yet he treats economic and military alliances as zero sum games as if he is haggling about the price of drywall. US participation in NATO is about power projection and power amplification, via an alliance which is unmatched in military and economic strength. And yet, Trump appears to want to weaken that alliance to the disadvantage of the US and the advantage of only one other country: Russia. So, my only conclusion is that Trump is either unhinged, or he is, in fact, a Russian operative.
3
Frustrating article. I would like an in depth report on the the issue of the failure to meet a 2% agreement. One commenter says it was not an agreement, but a long range target. Is it true, as suggested in the comments, that we are getting used by the Europeans, and that though Trump has a fair argument, he goes about his bullying in a way almost guaranteed to undermine NATO,
1
This isn't incompetence. It's a determined strategy. Trump is driving the United States into the Kremlin's embrace by leaving no other alternatives.
5
The US occupies Europe for its own defense and advantage, as a hedge against Russian expansionism. Perhaps Europeans should expel Trump and the US from NATO for with a friend like us who needs enemies. Europe is not our puppet and has interests that we can no longer dictate especially as Trump is selling our country out to Russia and we enter Putin's orbit.
3
One of Trump's core beliefs is that chaos benefits the US. He may learn otherwise and we (Americans) will pay a high price.
2
Very short sighted of those few who feel that the Europeans should defend themselves w/o help from U.S. No doubt they never studied history. Beware of isolationism, it has never worked in the type of world we live in.
Trump has tight control over his base. And from what he learned from Russia's ability to troll social media, he doesn't need their help anymore.
Doesn't anyone wonder if the ulterior motive for DT angering allies is to pull apart organizations such as NATO, NAFTA, etc., since doing so will be payback to Putin for his help in getting him elected? And then have his just as nasty offspring begin investments in Russia, and more payola to Tsar Vladimir.
Shame on DT for taking advantage of his fan's ignorance.
3
It gets so tiresome fighting history. Like your shadow, you can never escape from it until you turn off the light, then kick yourself realizing how easy that was.
1
I loathe Trump, but he's right in this case. NATO was established to counter Soviet aggression in Eastern Europe, and to provide for the security of all of its members.
Where was NATO when the United States was attacked on Sept. 11th, 2001? Where was NATO when Putin's Russia invaded Crimea? NATO has been weak against aggression, which only invites more. The member countries much honor their commitment to defense, because after an attack it will be too late.
Well maybe it’s about time Norway, Belgium, Germany and Canada did more than just sit there on their piles of money and look down their noses at the rest of the world. Maybe it’s refreshing to finally have a president that’s not too impressed with all that white glove and tie continental charm. What’s anybody dressed like that good for any way?
1
Have you seen Trump's gold leaf clad apartment in Trump Tower? How about his reputed gold clad toilet? Do you find those as objectionable as his tuxedo? Want to guess at the price of his tailor-made shirts and suits? How about Melania's jackets and dresses that are tens of thousands apiece? Is that what you are referring to?
3
Can't wait for Trump presidency to end. It is depressing to read his views and positions on matters of great importance. Unfortunately the world will continue to pay consequences of his mostly selfish actions for decades to come.
3
The Wall Street-Council on Foreign Relations-New York Times newsroom elites don't get it.
Trump was elected because he promised to put America first
Cracking down on illegal immigration, demanding our allies pull their weight and slapping China with serious tariffs certainly displeases the Georgetown-Upper West Side types, but it plays very well in most of America and falls neatly under the rubric of America First
Trump's poll numbers have surged since the beginning of the year and his approval now hovers between 43-45 percent
The out of touch elites didn't see Trump coming in 2016 and they're not seeing him coming now.
Do not underestimate this man. He's got his pulse on the American people more than any president since Clinton.
1
Putin's winning again and he hasn't even spent this years election meddling budget. There's a Red Wave coming and it's not one Donnie want's to talk about.
2
As someone who grew up in Europe, I can assure you that many people their would be happy with the US reducing it’s military presence and even closing some of its bases. Not everybody buys into the narrative that Russia is the problem. So keep making empty threats Mr Trump you might just get what you whish for!
3
Mr. Trump's idea of diplomacy is to bully this country's allies as if they were enemies of the United States. Also, it is interesting that this never came up for discussion from any other administration in the 100 years since World War I.
1
The obvious seems to escape him.
That is that since the end of WWII the European countries are part of our front line defense against the Russians and that some, if not all, buy armaments from the major producer (U.S.) and at least Germany has our troops on their soil.
Of course now he is buddies with Putin who can be trusted!
5
We have a 160 billion trade deficit with the EU, they don't pay their required amount for NATO, we pay for a huge percentage of the the UN?? Stop sponging off of us nato countries.
1
Now we know the “gift” Trump is bringing to Putin. One thing for sure, Outin got his money’s worth in making Trump President.
I do think countries should pay their agreed-upon amounts and I have no problem with reducing our military presence in Germany BUT these are things to negotiate in private. Thing is, Trump is not a negotiator, he’s a bully and this is just more evidence.
1
But if Russia is a friend of Trump, who is NATO supposed to fight? No point asking sensible questions though. This all more populist nonsense from Trump.
1
Reading this article as well as many of the comments, the continuing hatred of President Trump seems to impact on the ability to see anything he does fairly or objectively. I include NY Times journalists in this group.
It is fairly obvious that some NATO members continue to not pay their fair share in protecting themselves. Efforts by past presidents to get them to do so with "diplomacy" were largely ineffective and it is also obvious that President Trump is upping the pressure as the logical next step. Of course if you hate the president it is easy to conclude he is being a bully and is nasty to boot.
1
Endless unjust warring for the benefit of our corporations costs lots of money, and now that we’ve blown up our tax base with the unjust tax breaks that our unjust Congress pushed through, let’s try getting more from our allies for our unjust lying about what has really happened since our unjust Supreme court appointed Bush President!
1
There are only two countries in Europe we rely on in combat, British and French. They do spend 2% of GDP on defense. Countries most exposed to Russia, poland and Baltic states, are already at 2% mark 8 years ahead of 2024. If Greece or Portugal increase their spendig and increase their poorly trained armies by 10,000 it has no value for Pentagon. They may be used in natural disasters at the most.
The whole debate doesn’t make any sense, likely the notion that Europeans are free riders comes from Russia and Trump is eating every word Putin tells him.
4
Being the richest country on earth make us MUCH more responsible for the defense of our alliances. Just as rich people should pay their FAIR share of taxes, which is much more than they currently pay. With great fortune come great responsibility. Not a hallmark of tRumpian "thinking."
4
Yes, The Con Don and his Robber Baron brethren want the world to ramp up for WW3. They want to go down in HIStory as the biggest destroyers. Boggles the mind.
Sorry, boys and girls, over MY dead body will you destroy OUR government and lives.
NO WW3.
Not now. Not ever.
9
As long as we have a Republican government there is no chance that increased European spending on military would reduce US spending on its military. And even if it did result in savings for us there is no chance Republicans would spend it on healthcare and education like Germany does. Germany's investment in healthcare and education does not result from their relatively smaller military budget, it comes from their country's values which include improving the health and success of its citizenry, values which our Republican administration does not share.
6
The US needs to get its finances in order to take care of its citizens, especially in healthcare. Germany is a prosperous country and should meet the 2% GDP spending goal it agreed to four years ago, as should other countries that are able to do so.
2
The problem with most of the world is that it equates spending inordinate amounts of money on military as somehow spending money on peace. If you invest in economies around the world - infrastructure, products, communities, schools, jobs - you have created a more vital investment than military.
I suppose the theory is to avoid nuclear war at all costs, thus developing highly lethal, non-nuclear weapons as more desirable and more preposterous. When will mankind truly learn to do something utilitarian?
12
We spend what we spend on "defense" (though we never do anything with it but "attack") because we want to, because it's a big chunk of our economy, because it makes the right people rich (whereas paving roads and building schools does not). That other countries choose to spend their wealth in other, more productive and less bellicose ways shouldn't be grounds for a scolding. Europe hasn't called on us to defend it in several generations and it is increasingly unlikely to do so in the future.
14
In Chapter 5 of Ben Rhodes' book "The World As It Is", he addresses the question "What is American foreign policy?" He describes endeavors that are multi-faceted, directed towards many countries, funded by a trillion dollar budget, and that often have results that in the moment look mixed. He states: "We sustain these investments because, on balance, we believe the return is worth it even if we occasionally suffer losses, embarrassment, or moral compromises."
Could the contrast between Obama and Trump policy and attitude be any more stark? I miss our 44th President immensely.
10
hhhman--Me, too. I also miss our State Department. I miss our allies.
4
It is only fair to add that when they get to 2% of GDP it will not save US a dime. Many comments wrongly suggest the opposite, that we will have extra money to spend. Also, a separate agreements regulate how much the host countries contribute to US bases there. Usually it is 50-50 and increasing that to 60-40 would save us money. Trump is not talking about that.
6
The US is the only world power.
Without a strong US military presence in its NATO ally countries in Europe they could not sustain their sovereign nation status if invaded by Russia. Such, these country's need to meet the minimum GNP of the standards AS SET FORTH under the agreement in 2014 isn't asking; rather its pleading for an obligation to be met.
5
This isn't a "Trump" thing. President Obama used the phrase "Free Riders" to describe this problem when badgering the European nations to hold up their end of the treaty, resulting in the 2014 agreement *to work towards* meeting their commitments. The 2% is as old as NATO.
The US has never managed to transition from a wartime industrial-military complex driven economy to one focussing its energies on improving infrastructure and living conditions for its citizens, such as better mass transit, health care, housing, education, and so on. While we were busy fighting our ideological wars dreaming of world dominance, the EU formed and became a model of peace, commerce, and citizen rights focus, something we planted the seeds for with the Marshall Plan. Why are we suddenly oh so surprised? Instead of bashing our creation, how about getting back to a free market, non-military industrial complex economy that would actually benefit the US citizenry?
13
The 2014 Wales Summit Declaration actually says:
"aim to move towards the 2% guideline within a decade with a view to meeting their NATO Capability Targets and filling NATO's capability shortfalls."
So, our wrong-headed, blustering wind bag NOW DECIDES to send letters - TO PUT INTO WRITING - his doubling down on his incessant rant about NATO Allies not paying their dues.
The wording - "to move towards" the guideline by 2024 - was obviously designed TO ENCOURAGE.
LETTERS of divisive scolding to our NATO Allies. And NO FACTUAL REQUIREMENT! Trump resorts to this cowardly act to achieve his public posturing for his fans AND TO AVOID APPLYING new and concerted NATO pressure on Russia!
Spending twice the amount of Obama on golf in half the time and giving himself a $30M military parade, Trump bullies our friends baselessly over money AND GOES SOFT on Putin. That's our actual leader.
The gutless Ryan and McConnell refuse their leadership duty to check Trump's obvious erosive conduct to our NATO alliance. Vote them out!
20
Too bad they agreed to the 2% in 2006. Only the hostilities in the Donbass region and the annexation of Crimea acted prompted them to (re)realize the importance of territorial security.
You do not have to be a genius or a rocket scientist to understand Trump's motive and intention to decimate or dismantle or weaken the NATO. Trump wants to please Putin. He is grateful to Putin. Putin groomed him over the years to make him our president ( may be without Trump's knowledge). Putin helped him in 2016 campaign that he can never repay Putin back. Now Trump will do everything possible to make Putin happy. In NATO alliance, only we the Americans start and involved in wars and battles with so many countries and the European countries and Canada help us by participating. European countries never start any war.
18
Or, you do not have to be a genius or a rocket scientist to know that several of our NATO allies have been more than willing to sponge off our military prowess and expertise for decades, and that unwillingness to spend an agreed-to amount to ensure minimal capability invites aggression and puts American forces at risk.
Your final comment that ‘European countries never start any war’ is easily disproven by opening a history book.
Enough of our policy "nothing succeeds like excess".
If America reduced its military spending, rather than increasing it, and focused more on diplomacy and less on fear, the world would be a better place.
30
Trump is correct in chastising other NATO members for not contributing more towards their defense; however, one has to wonder if he is more concerned about protecting Putin than Europe. It will be revealing to see the outcome of the Mueller investigation, the large thorn in the president's side.
4
Yes the EU (and Canada) should spend more.
However it is not NATO which is costing the US, but the ill-fated invasions of Irak / Afghanistan*, the inefficient and uncontrolled military procurement (F35, FCS/FGS ...), the multiplication of intelligence agencies, the refusal of Congress to streamline (close) military bases and more generally its corrupt pork barrel approach ... etc.
* with the exception of the successful 2001 campaign to topple the talibans
15
Trump's bluster and bullying aside, if he pulls the US out of NATO, which Republicans in Congress may protest, nuclear proliferation will take off like a bullet train. Germany is still hamstrung by military limitations imposed on them after WW2. If the US withdraws from NATO would Germany then be allowed to purchase/develop nukes? Also, while it's true that most NATO partners don't spend as much as the NATO charter requires, it is also true that we should all be spending less on defense. Finally, no matter whose side you're on, dissolving NATO over a technicality would greatly hurt the US should Putin further is expansionary goals. Be careful Trump, you really don't understand the concept of dominoes.
12
Diplomacy has not worked with these deadbeat EU countries. In the meantime the US becomes further in debt to the tune of $21T not including unfunded liabilities. This is not sustainable. Trump is correct. Finally a business approach that makes sense. You pay more! MAGA!
1
Trump’s policies may have many effects, but shattering the alliance system that has underpinned the global power of the US while simultaneously uprooting the global trade system that has enriched it like no nation before it is not going to Make America Great Again.
132
There might be thinking that the US still has a trunk card to play: the federal reserve and the fact that US dollar remain the world's trading currency--remain hopefully the most trusted currency in the world, and lots of tricks can still be deployed to control and influence.
Even if I'm an outsider, living in a non-Nato country, I tend to agree with Sven.
As a Democrat, I must put aside my suspicion of the Republican Party’s motives on this occasion for this measure suggested by President Trump is long overdue. For far too long, the United States has served as the world’s policeman, benefactor and moral force. This is the clearest manifestation of sole superpower status that exists. This reality served America and the world well for decades after World War II. The credibility created by this support helped America win the Cold War against the Soviet Union. However, today this status has begun to harm us. It has led to our misguided and counterproductive belief of exceptionalism, causing us to ignore our obvious faults, such as our government’s irrational tilt toward the wealthy and the subsequent diminution of our great American democracy. It is high time the other advanced and wealthy nations of our world started contributing a generous but reasonable share of financial support to NATO and the United Nations to ensure the political and economic stability of our world.
3
This is the continuation of trump cozying up to, and talking nicely about despots while making enemies of our allies. I despair for America.
2
The US pays 22 percent of the costs of NATO. That is hardly an unfair proportion.
1
What does Putin have on Trump? Even were Trump right on the facts, why is he destabilizing our alliance? If I were Estonia I wouldn't be sure of Trump's commitment to our mutual defense. I would be afraid (no wait, I, an American citizen am afraid) of what private deal Trump may make with Putin.
11
In 2017 the German Parliament commissioned a report on the state of its military. Some of the report's key findings follow. Of Germany's 128 Eurofighters only 39 were operational. Of their 13 frigates, only 5 could sail. Of their 6 submarines, none were functional. Clearly Germany's priorities are not the common defense but rather quality of life enhancing policies such as free education and healthcare....but it doesn't seem fair that US taxpayers should subsidize this, all the while paying a fortune for healthcare and education here at home. Impolitic as he may be, Trump is on to something.
8
Sam, Trump isn't on to anything.
There's no bill for NATO.
Each country spends what it wants to on NATO.
The US has decided that rather than spend money on education, healthcare and infrastructure, they would rather spend it on the military.
That's why your country is so far behind other western nations.
Stop wasting your money on the military and spend it on your society.
4
Why not just keep this simple. While both the US and Europe have strategic interests in a Strong NATO, the insurance it provides is far more important to Europe than it is to the US. Given that, it is quite clear that Europe has largely chosen to underinvest leaving the US in a position of paying too much of the premium. All US presidents have taken notice on this undeniable fact. Europe has to date been entirely content to drag feet on the issue for many reasons. Now the US demands are being criticized simply because it is Trump pressing them. Standard fare.
10
always money matters, right? is it financial nationalism? Trump is a typical capitalist as his past and present indicate. and the capitalism world has been made by the alliance this article is championing. Trump was born to and has spent his life in exactly this "freedom" bloc. should I recognise him as a mutant? perhaps he's haunted by Czar or Hwang-ti or Sultan exceptionally? then, is it okay to just remove him from the office? like exorcizing? like conjuring? in French, 'Conjuration' means excorcism, too, but at the same time, engagement/conspiration/coalition. we need to look into it.
Getting out of NATO and the UN is a dream of the Kochs who want all treasury dollars to go to them and their cabal of like-minded plutocrats. Trump is not advancing Putin's desire, although they coincide in this case, as much as it is pleasing the libertarians running the former Republican Party, which is why there will be no push-back from McConnell or Ryan. To think otherwise is to be ignorant of the very real and present danger in our midst. The Kochs and libertarians are no more our friends than is Putin or Kim Jong un.
6
Maybe Europe should start charging the US lease for the land the US bases are on.
18
Do you suppose Trump now wants to announce
big new fluffy Alliance for Peace with Putin, a la rapturous buddyship with Kim, extending circle of mendacious kleptocrats and necessitating immediate shutdown of investigation into Russian meddling & collusion.
Unlike tired old allies aspiring to Democracy, these new heavy hitters really know how to get things done, that I can tell you!
3
Trump should be sending "sharply worded letters" to Putin instead of our NATO allies. But he keeps antagonizing our friends while cuddling up to our enemies. Question is WHY?
16
That is the question most asked.
1
Let's just face facts... Trump wants to be king, has no interest in democracy, cares little for people other than himself, and that's where we're heading, unless we do something about it.
21
If there was ever a way to break up NATO, this is exactly what it would look like.
So Trump doing the bidding of Putin is following the game plan perfectly.
Another reason to get rid of this enemy of the state.
16
Someone should explain to the Donald that global warming and pandemic are a huge threat to the American Public and the world. If you're worried about our borders wait until people around the globe start running out of fresh water.
Germany is spending a huge amount on renewable energy. On a per capita basis the EU is producing about .30% of the carbon emissions as a US citizen does.
National health care and the Paris agreement are way more important than having a German military that can threaten the world. Germany spends about what Russia spends on National defense. Why would anyone want Germany to become a country run by a military industrial complex again?
19
Many Canadians have come to the realization that Canada should withdraw from NATO altogether. Trump's latest demands only emphasize that point. We send money to NATO, which is spent by the U.S. with no regard to our wishes. And now Trump wants even more. What part of the world is he contemplating invading now? Americans claim they're "defending" us. Against whom? Canada has no enemies. Unless you count the current occupant of the White House.
14
Sadly, Canada has underfunded its once-proud and lethal (but always brave) military to a point at which it can barely assert sovereignty over its own territory four flying hours north of Toronto. A few Inuit Rangers with rifles doesn’t cut it.
As such, Canada is free to withdraw from NATO and disarm further because... ‘no enemies.’ Just know that the US should demand in response that Canada cede its Arctic lands to the US to ensure the safety and security of North America.
The US already defends the Arctic in spite of Canadian unwillingness to do so. Let’s just make the arrangement official shall we?
Let's just have the US stay south of the border where you belong.
The only threat to Canada is from the US, the Russians already have enough non arable land and snow.
1
And yet, Mr Sheridan, it has been Canada, as the pointy, strategic end of the mighty British Empire spear pointed at the US, that was the only major threat to the US until the rise of the USSR and China and their ability to reach us with their ICBMs.
Recall that the British Empire during the American Civil War was more than willing to toss all revulsion against slavery aside to support the Confederacy in an attempt to help destroy the United States. Only when the Brits saw the South couldn’t ultimately win the war after Gettysburg did British support for the South wane. (It may have been the assassination of Abraham Lincoln that stopped vengeful Union armies from finally taking out the threat to the US from the British Empire via Canada.)
And the Canadian Arctic is desirable for its strategic location and potential mineral wealth, not as a location to grow wheat. Take care of it lest others decide to do that for you.
A guy who puts little children in cages in old Walmart buildings shouldn't complain about the actions of other people.
10
Having Trump in control of the military assets of the United States, is extremely dangerous for the world precisely because his self-inflicted ignorance and unwillingness to take any counsel contrary to its puny products results in him making stupid decisions that his clinical narcissism then compels him to defend with an ever growing number of (ir)rationalizations and lies. Every world leader, like the rest of us, is now well aware of ,and struggling to navigate like Ulysses through, the Scylla and Charybdis presented by Trump's particular pair of pernicious proclivities. May the Gods of Homer guide them, and us all, safely home.
7
I think that Trump does not care about history. He is not a deep thinker but he is clever enough to have gotten to where he is. It seems to me that he sees foreign affairs unlike nearly everyone who was involved in arranging the world order since WWII. He seems to think that nations are naturally competitors and for any to succeed others must fail. In order to maintain an advantage a country must be in control assured by fear in the other countries with which it is involved to deter their predatory inclinations and to convince them to give into the dominant country. It’s how he views business, I think, and why he has gone through so many bankruptcies and civil suits over unmet agreements. He’s a solo act the whole way.
Long overdue.
Caring for Europe has always been a fool's errand, sold to the public as a means to prevent new wars.
That "sale" now rings hollow when protecting a country with twice our population and a GDP equal to our own.
Cutting these parasites loose is reasonable, yet no other president dared to challenge this status quo - much to this country's detriment.
Trump is open to charges of buffoonery, but the real question here is "Why did it take a buffoon to correctly identify our national interest?" That's something to ponder. Shame on those who served before him.
We needed a wrecking ball to clean out Washington. Yes there will be cleanup later.....but this wrecking had to happen.
9
Actually, there is no evidence supporting anything that you assert. Not one thing. NATO has never been a burden and what the U.S. wanted to happen with respect to that arrangement is exactly what has happened. The current difficulties faced by Europe originated outside of Europe, from the difficulties with the global economy since the financial crash of 2008 and the warfare in the Middle East and the regime changes across North Africa causing massive refugee movements were not caused by Europeans.
9
Europe would probably be better off to be rid of us, especially as Trump is acting as if he's in Putin's hip pocket.
8
I cringe to say it, but Europe needs to improve their militaries so they may have a chance to protect themselves. Not just from Russia, but also the US. Trump is simply dangerous to all Democracies.
This rhetoric just before meeting with Putin sounds too much like a prelude to making deals with Putin; one that tells Putin he can move forward with his plans for further conquest.
This is just Trump's excuse to leave NATO and help Putin. This trick is more proof of Trump's conspiracy with Russia and his catering to Putin. It is very scary that Trump is trying to blow up all of our alliances and weaken us while making things easier for dictators. Doesn't this make him a traitor? The GOP's enabling of all of this makes them co-conspirators.
16
The insulated New York Times and the Georgetown/David Gergen/Aspen Institute elites do not understand that most of America sees Trump demanding that our NATO allies contribute their fair share and they completely agree
8
Well, as you indicated most of America can agree with Trump, demonstrating once again that a majority of people can be wrong.
3
For a president of what was once the greatest country in the word he has worked , in between his constant tweets and vacations at our expense to drop us close to the bottom of the barrel.
Trump keep it up and when your base gets hit with huge health cost increases, price increases because of your mindless tariff war, fewer vacations to what was once our crown jewels of National Parks and the realization that all those jobs you promised to bring back to the US and all you promises you made about everyone sharing in the results when you decided that the rich needed more than a trillion dollars at the expense of the vast majority of the American people then your base will turn on you and vote against you in 2018 and drive you out in the 2020 election.
PLEASE, keep doing the same thing so America will be once again the most powerful nation in the world.
Unfortunately whenever Republican are the majority they screw over this country and it takes many years to bring it back. But this time you will not be involved so it will work.
6
People deny evidence of folly way past proof because they have such highly developed imaginations and so little patience with complicated thinking and such high need for social affiliations that loyalty can make them averse from withdrawing support from a charismatic leader. Trump will blame Obama and The Democrats and his supporters will not object.
He's right
4
So America, in a country of 320 million, this specimen Trump was the best you could do.There is little reason not to show contempt for you.
25
Yes, it was depressing that the appalling DJT along with the duplicitous and venal Hillary Clinton were the best we could do. Lousy election, huh...
1
Stop the war attitude and reduce our national debt are more important than flex our military muscles. The hidden costs of US military expenses are enormous. Put and station our soldiers overseas, rent air forces bases, and establish military hospitals & personnel in foreign countries are prohibitive expensive. The post war medical costs for our veterans not only essential and expensive but also detrimental to our veteran morale. The long lasting Iraqi war proves our ineffective policy in the Middle East. Withdraw from NATO could be an effective way to reduce our national debt.
1
So could reversing a recent payoff to rich folks.
2
As usual, Trump takes a sledge hammer approach instead of behind the scenes diplomacy. However, he is absolutely correct. For 70 years the US has carried much of the cost of NATO. There is no reason why countries like Canada, Germany, Norway and many others pay half of what they should. In Trumps mind, they are subsidizing their welfare states with their 32 hour work weeks, 7 weeks of vacation, retirement at 58 and national healthcare on the tax dollars of Americans. Other US presidents have raised this issue but never forcefully. Let’s hope our NATO allies get the message.
It's about time. For decades the U.S. has spent massive sums projecting its manpower around the globe in order to protect European interests while they condescendingly moralize about how we should be more peaceful. Let them pay to ensure that Middle East oil is pumped and shipped to their ports.
2
Well we could just get the oil from Russia or Iran...
3
If our government wants to treat our military as the largest welfare program in the country, there is no reason other countries have to follow suit.
6
He befriends the powers that NATO is set up to defend against, then he asks the NATO allies to pay more while he at the same time treat them as enemies and lunge a trade war against them.
Who is writing this script?
If Europe will start to build more weapons they might be pointed towards the USA. The biggest threat is always the enemy that cannot be reasoned with.
3
How could he have so completely fulfilled Putin's most ambitious wish list? He doesn't read, knows nothing about policy debates, and has few ideas. If Putin is not surprised at his incredible good luck, it can only be that he actually has something on Trump- that he actually controls him. That fits his spymaster background. As outrageous as that sounds, it's finally the best explanation about what's going on.
10
Why wouldn't the U.S. FORCE their "allies" to honor the treaty they signed? Why should the requirement to spend a certain amount of GDP be treated any less seriously than the one to protect the other members?
Seems to me, a treaty is a treaty. You either honor the terms or you don't have much of anything. I approve 100%. The U.S. has exactly zero - some would argue less - for being the world's policeman. We spend WAYYYY too much, and get basically nothing in return.
3
Am I the only one that sees Putin all over anything Trump says/does against NATO (or any of our international alliances for that matter)? He's getting exactly what he wanted...
13
No, you're not the only one. Most of the rest of us are tired of stating the obvious.
This is about money for Trump. He thinks he's going to make a bundle in Putin's oligarchy post presidency. And, you know what? He probably will. Two corrupt peas in a pod.
Putin is either sucking up to this fool big time, or has something on him. Maybe both.
Maybe it's a good idea to bring home all those active duty troops. They can all pick crops here after Trump kicks out all the Mexicans. There's something like 8,000 troops in the Middle East--they sure know how to work in the heat.
2
The trillon dollars and 1000s of lives spent "winning" in Iraq alone should be enough to shut down the complainers here that are so tired of spending their "blood & treasure" on Europe and Canada. Think of how the US could have benefited from those people and resources.
As the most destabilizing force in the developing world since the fall of the British Empire, the USA deserves to pay the lions share for defense of NATO. There would be virtually no terrorism in the middle east as we know it if not for the actions of the US and Russia. Now Europe bears the brunt of the cost to take in the refugees.
also, how would America respond of Germany was to build up a comparable military to their own? Something tells me that wouldn't be appreciated.
5
The consequence of WWII was that most of the world (outside of the Soviet sphere of influence) consisted of client states beholden to the United States. NATO was the European military component of those postwar relationships. It enforced American dominance. In contrast to the prewar years, American troops had unparalleled access (including bases) to virtually all of Europe. In the East there were American troops in Japan, Korea, Guam, and the Philippines.
NATO allowed a nation-state (the US) removed by geography to be a dominant player in relation to what Halford Mackinder described as the World Island - "Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; Who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; Who rules the World Island commands the World." And Trump now wants to quibble (motivated by domestic politics) over chump change?
Trump's posturing reflects the advanced decline of the American Empire, the resurgence of the Russians, the growing independence of the Europeans, and (above all) the increasing challenge from the Chinese.
Trump is aping the behavior displayed by Eden during the Suez crisis of 1956. Instead of discretely seeking diplomatic solutions that reflect the new global realities and the altered disposition of economic and military power - Trump (following Bush and Obama) blunders on.
As with Eden during a similar collapse of British muscle - such a display of unbridled nationalism will end badly - particularly with such an incompetent captain at the helm.
6
Fear and loathing of NATO is a key pillar of Putin’s cooption of the conservative ant-globalist movement in the US. Trump is a key asset as is Steve Bannon and others in what Malcom Nance describes as a right wing coalition coddled together, in part, by Russians as a political force to Make Russia Great Again. The WTO and other organizations that established a trade oder favorable to the West and the US is under attack from within our own borders where, ironically, something more dangerous lurks than anything coming from across them.
3
Our NATO allies put their money into universal health care. We put ours into weapon systems, a lot of which the military doesn't even want, and don't take care of many of our own citizens.
Seems like Europe has the moral high ground. If Trump doesn't like the disparity, he should cut our bloated military budget and take care of our own people.
7
Here we go again......
I didn't vote for Trump in 2016 and I won't vote for him in 2020, but there's is virtually no room to criticize him on this issue. We have an understanding, the understanding is that each NATO member will spend 2% of GDP on defense. 23 of our NATO allies are not living up to their responsibilities. This isn't about military adventurism, war mongering or anything else other than our allies willingness to let us shoulder a disproportionate burden of defense costs. For those who look to blame Trump and any other president, simply put, you're wrong. Multiple presidents, in both parties, have raised the issue. Your anti-Trump animus is blinding you to a legitimate grievance. Yes, projecting forward power through a global military presence helps us greatly, but it helps our allies even more. They get a lot of "bang for their buck" will the US behind them. If Europe wants to go it alone, without US military support......good luck. That's never going to work and they know it. They need us a lot more than we need them and the least they could do is live up to our informal agreement.
3
"They need us a lot more than we need them." I think this statement is the basis of Trump's entire foreign policy. That being said, the next few years will test the veracity of this statement.
2
You are the one in the wrong.
IRL: NATO countries have committed that the 2% threshold should be reached by 2024, and we are in 2018.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_67655.htm?selectedLocale=en
Moreover: "The 2 percent [of GDP in military spending on your own forces] standard is just a guideline, not a legally binding requirement." (NYT, "Trump Says NATO Allies Don’t Pay Their Share. Is That True?")
IRL:
"The U.S. share [in the NATO budget] is calculated on the basis of gross national income — the total domestic and foreign output claimed by residents of a country — and adjusted regularly. Currently [2016] that would be about 22 percent, compared to about 15 percent for Germany, 11 percent for France, 10 percent for the United Kingdom, 8 percent for Italy, 7 percent for Canada, and so forth. (...)
Daalder, however, notes that mismatch in overall defense spending occurs in large part because the U.S. military projects its might across the globe. “Our proportion includes spending for our entire military, which of course has global responsibilities [sic, will to meddle everywhere], whereas Luxembourg does not,” he said." (washingtonpost, Trump’s claim that the U.S. pays the ‘lion’s share’ for NATO)
So they are paying they fair share of NATO budget and are "living up to their responsibilities", contrarily to the US, the "biggest threat to peace in the world" (WIN/Gallup International), whose warmongers have created most of the mess in the world, notably in the M-E.
1
These countries are not keeping their promise as part of NATO to spend a certain amount of their GDP on military spending. Amazing how this article tries to make Trump look like the bad guy (like he needs any help). For many years some NATO countries have not kept up their agreed military spending for their own defense because they expect America to pay for it. And we did for many years. And now all of a sudden we’re the bad guys because we’re tired of paying for other countries’ defense? NATO is outdated and needs to go anyway.
3
Although I agree that both political parties are bought and paid for, when it comes to the military industrial medical complex that we call the economy; the more nuanced truth is that the Democrats are somewhat compromised and the Republicans are very much more compromised. Currently, however, the one who is wholly compromised and utterly bought and paid for, is Donald Trump, president of the USA. He is Vladimir Putin's Michael Cohen!
1
Now that Trump has denuclearized N. Korea, moved out of the trouble spots of the Middle East, found a way to get along with China, and has established a love affair with Putin and Russia, we can slash OUR military budget. There are no remaining threats (except from Trump). We face only world peace -- and only Trump could have done that.
5
U.S. arms profiteers have gotten rich from our position in NATO and other alliances around the globe, and I'm not sure about them taking reduced profits lightly. It's our own War Machine that has insisted we maintain an oversized stance in Europe.
Could it be that trumpie is ready to hand Europe off to Vladimir?
6
The bailing out of Western Europe should end. Let them fend for themselves. Yes, yes, I know history has proven they are unable to do so alone, but so be it, let this new generation learn the hard way.
3
So, twice in the last century we had to save the world from the Germans. Now, they are committed suicide with their open border policies. Yet the US still continues to spend money protecting these people. I am all in for Trump telling anyone is not paying their 2% of GDP that we will no longer protect them. And I am very happy about the recent elections in Austria and Italy. I am visiting both countries in October.
And contrary to reader's picks here, I can guarantee you most Americans support this.
2
Putin must have some big stuff on Donald. Donald doing his 4th grade bullying on the world's leaders, when is he going to grow up? The US spends more on military than the top TEN countries combined spend on military - how much more does he need to feel protected? Meanwhile the world is turning their backs on America with tariff wars happening everywhere. Donald gives our NATO partners an "or else" if they don't comply. OR ELSE WHAT? Once the troops leave, they won't be invited back and Donald will have isolated America from everyone else who could potentially help us.
1
He has never understood that what has made America great was our willingness to stand up to bad actors and protect those countries who cannot protect themselves.
This power made it possible for us to establish the US dollar as the world's reserve currency.
We will continue our retreat from the world stage. Do not be surprised when the US dollar is no longer the reserve currency. America will no longer be great when we are buying goods in yuan.
5
Ultimately, if things get bad enough and measured tit-for-tat isn't working because of imperialist arrogance and imbecilic trade policy in the USA, Canada can spend even less by cancelling all military procurement from US defense industries and pulling out of mutual defense agreements, including burden sharing on international military deployments and cooperation on security and intelligence. The money saved could then be used to assist industrial transition to more diversified and balanced investment and trading arrangements with other countries. This would be a logical step to consider if the Administration imposes tariffs on auto industry trade between the two countries.
6
How is removing troops an imperialist move? Empty attacks using liberal buzzwords won’t save you.
1
You obviously didn't understand what I said, and it is not an"empty attack" - it's a strategic option" that can be deployed for very specific policy purposes.
And I should add - none of this has anything to do with being "saved". Until Donald Trump assumed the Presidency, the US-Canada relationship was a world model of decency and reciprocity with understandings in just about every area of political and economic life. The current US Administration clearly has problems with this history so it is using bully tactics to re-write the rules - not only with Canada but with the EU and others. Countries outside the US are not looking to be "saved" - especially by this government, whose word cannot be trusted from one day to the next. Countries look after their own interests and will not cow-tow to Donald Trump over important violations of national interest. Do you remember when Trump first met Trudeau - Trump said he has no issues with Canada and NAFTA only needed "a few tweaks". Well, those "tweaks" have now added-up to tariffs on lumber and paper, airplanes, steel and aluminum, with threats to the Auto sector that has been integrated cross-border since 1965. What lesson does one draw from this about trust in dealing with so-called allies? When faced with this kind of blistering duplicity, ignorance and incompetence, other governments can be expected to take measures to save themselves.
1
Time, I think, for the EU to start some form of partnership with China.
5
Putin "installs" Trump as President.
Then all of a sudden, the U.S. does everything it can to alienate its allies and destroy any agreements the U.S. might have or be considering with other countries, i.e. the TPP, NATO, Brexit, NAFTA, Canada, the EU, etc., etc. Putin has at last found a way to destroy any nation that opposed to his expansionist agenda, and he did it from the inside!
Would love to be a fly on the wall during the upcoming Bro-fest between Trump and Putin.
But seeing as how I can't be, what must we do to end this concentration of world power into the hands of the Oligarchs - Russian, Chinese, American, Murdoch, Koch, etc., etc.?
8
If Europe must spend more on their military to appease Trump the Destroyer, here's how to do it.
Stop buying American weapons systems; cut orders for the F-35. There are plenty of European arms makers. Europe can spend more, and keep that money in Europe.
6
A lot of the components for European military companies are made in America.
I never thought I would ever think or say this, but given the behavior of this President , the behavior of Putin and the change in China re Xi remaining as essentially "President for life " it is time for Germany to aggressively rearm, in conjunction with her European Allies.
4
I completely agree.
With Putin, Xi and Trump, the world order is about to be re-ordered.
All the other countries in the world should be alert.
1
The cold was is over. NATO should whither away. Do we really need to guard the North Atlantic?
2
Putin has the same thought as you!
1
Ask yourself this again when Putin moves on more European countries.
Do you understand that everything Trump does is to advance the causes of Vladimir Putin and his country?
1
Just one more reason why I love this president. Finally a president who has the will to make things happen. It’s no surprise that the Europeans are free loaders, their ponzu scheme has gotten them into deep trouble and now they can no longer take advantage of the U.S. I absolutely love this man.
6
As a member of a cult you are compelled to say stuff like "I love this man." A person you don't know. Scary. Folks: at least half of the 40% who support trump are in a cult. What is the solution for that?
2
You said it the Ponzi scheme at home will bite us good and hard as we fall into another recession.
1
Perhaps if Trump clearly expressed which nations presented the threat that we are facing he might get a better reaction. Is it Russia, whose leader he seems to be cuddling up to? Is it North Korea, whom he has assured us is no longer a threat? Or is it ISIS whom he has assured us he has beaten? Maybe it’s China, who’s leader he admires and gets along with? Or maybe he just likes making noise and wants to prepare the way for Imperial America, world leader in everything thanks to him?
3
Trump creates more friction with our Allies... just as Putin has directed Trump to do.
7
Remember what the US did almost a century ago when they decided to become more self-focused. Back then they did not want the League of Nations (the forerunner concept to the current UN), they did not want international trade and they did not want to get involved in any non-American regional conflict anywhere in the world. Now, did that approach work very well? What it did do was lead the next generation into WWII and that did not work out too well for most of the world. However, the Trump administration is thinking the same approach will work better for the USA in today's world. I guess they think that WWIII would be real winner for the USA today. Unfortunately, this time China and Russia would be the real winners and they most likely would never even think about aiding the USA in the then necessary recovery which would take at least one generation!
4
Anyone who does not believe that Trump is trying to blow up NATO is not paying attention. The only open question is whether he is blowing up NATO at Putin's behest, or because of a fundamental ignorance of the nature of the alliance.
No, NATO members do not owe money to the alliance nor the US. The 2% of GDP targets, to which members agreed they would be on track to meet by 2024, represent money owed to themselves, not anyone else. They are not in arrears, as no creditor, in the common understanding of the word, exists.
A collapse of NATO would have both obvious and not so obvious knock-on effects. Consider the prospect of a pan-European military force, absent the US, with Germany at it core.
Haven't we already tried this?
12
There has been an ongoing discussion about "free-riders" regarding NATO defense spending. This concern goes all the way back to 1946 when NATO was formed. In 2006, NATO countries pledged to spend 2% of their GDP on defense. Hostilities in the Donbass region and the annexation of Crimea acted as painful reminders that NATO countries must invest in their territorial defense, and NATO allies once again recommitted to increasing their spending to meet their 2006 obligations with a goal of hitting their targets by 2024. I don't think he wants to blow it up, but I'm certain he wants the 22 countries not meeting their "obligations" to pay for their "fair share".
19
In the photos I've seen of trump meeting with world leaders they seem to mimic his sitting on the edge of the chair posture. In this photo I love that Prime Minister Rutte refused to assume the ape about to jump pose and sat civilly but with a, quite correctly, grim expression. I can't imagine being in the same room with him but I know I am viscerally repulsed when I see photos of trump.
1
Well deserved criticism. Only a few NATO countries pay their agreed upon share of 2% of GDP with the biggest offender being Germany. Matter of fact, if there is any country that is economically capable of paying 2% of GDP toward defense, it's Germany for God's sake.
Yet the Germans have allowed their expenditures for defense to slipped down into the 1% range. How did that happen in a country that was occupied by Soviet troops in living memory???
2
Again we see that President Putin (Trump) would like to see a weaker US-EU relationship. Of course we can scale back our military there and decrease NATO spending. That of course could cause increases in pirate attacks on vessels, destabilize the EU, our biggest trading partner larger than China. And what will happen to all those US goods sold to the EU, or bought from the EU in the US? With our tax giveaway to the wealthy Trump now needs to find a way to decrease our spending in the military. He is just too much of a coward to actually say the truth, we collect less taxes than what we spend and need to make cuts. Of course if economic activity decreases, so will those tax revenues... Remember Bush's tax cuts from the early 2000s, that ended really well didn't it.
5
Let's see if this trump threat does any better than his tariff threats with our allies. It will not. Our allies will continue to stand up to trump, as they should. I keep hearing that trump continues to do Putin's bidding with all these confrontations with our allies, and NATO. At some point there is going to a negative domino fact to the US, with a down turn in our economy. America is going to be alone if trump continues on this path.
1
So is Trump right or wrong about the underspending? The article doesn't say.
1
NATO countries have committed that the 2% threshold should be reached by 2024. We are not yet there. However, I must say that some countries have not the right trajectory to reach that target. Most notably, Germany, on present trajectory would only reach 1.5% in 2024. So your president has a point but only a rhetoric one. There is not yet breach of agreement.
And to put things in perspective, I would add that the present military budgets of just Germany and Italy is already equal to the one of Russia.
Withdrawing from TPP benefits China. Withdrawing from NATO benefits Russia. Withdrawing from the Korean region and suspending joint military exercises benefits N. Korea & China.
Had former President Obama done this what would republicans say?
4
I must have missed the part we withdrew from NATO. As of this morning I thought we were still a full fledged member...that paid a disproportionate amount towards Europe's defense. Additionally, unless they left overnight, there were 25000ish US military members in South Korea when I went to sleep last night.
Why don't we take a lesson from how the European nations spend their money. They underspend on the military and overspend on schools, mass transit, health care, child care.
9
That's the whole point. They can spend on those things because they count on the US spending billions to protect them, while they cheat on their defense obligations.
3
I think the idea (and what Trump is arguing, not that I necessarily agree, I don't know the details) is that they can under-spend on the military and contribute more to their social system / infrastructure because the U.S. is footing the bill for their defense. If we cut the amount of funding to our own military, we will have to cut back on defense. Should we apply that cut to the forces that defend our interests, or should we apply that cut to the forces that defend other countries' interests (not that there wouldn't be overlap)? It's one or the either, right?
2
Must be nice when someone else covers a disproportionate cost of "your" defense. Makes it easy to spend "your" money on something else. SMH.....
He may be right in his assertions but he could would it better. This sounds every bit of extortion. If you don’t pay up, we won’t defend you when attacked. New York protection rackets tactics. Right now America has military presence in countries that do not want us there. Remember when US troops went to Somalia to help with famine & war lords? Those troops were attacked & killed by those people we went to help. Our forces are not winning any where in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Africa. Let those countries pay the US back. Just don’t threaten to withhold military help from allies. Of course with trump as leader no country would want our help & the US will have Russia defending it. If trump doesn’t like NATO then he should take the US out. Stop complaining about everything & save the money we pay in.
2
NATO member states agreed after the annexations of Crimea by Russia to raise their spending for the alliance to 2% of their respective GDP by the year of 2024.
Ergo they still have quite some time left. But our very stable genius in the Oval has the patience and attention span of a gnat.
A man that entered the White House as president, didn't even know what the nuclear triad was, but said 'if we have nukes, why don't we use them'.
Putin always wanted to destroy NATO. Now he has of all people an American President helping him with his outrageous attacks on European member states.
No one knows what Trump, the self declared greatest dealmaker in the history of the world, will give away to Putin as he did to to little rocket man Kim.
He might just start with cancelling all of America's multilateral "war games" with all its European members.
3
They agreed to 2% in 2006. Long before hostilities in the Donbass region and the annexation of Crimea. They just recommitted to the 2% in 2014 once they realized that it might be slightly important to ensure territorial security.
This has nothing to do with NATO or foreign policy or American interests. Trump is deliberately picking a fight to make himself look good in his supporters' eyes.
Part of this comes, I believe, from his sense of inferiority. He can't hold his own on an equal footing with other leaders (with other adults, actually), so, like a misbehaving child, he acts out, disrupting the entire process. This way he avoids potential embarrassment and forces everyone else to react to him. And, because he has America's economic and military clout behind him, he is then in control.
Welcome to 2018 America.
3
Maybe those "deadbeats" in Europe insist that healthcare and other social institutions are more important than defense spending. Particularly since Trump has such an excellent relationship with Putin and we have nothing to fear from Russia.
3
This carping about NATO is another of Trump's ill-informed shibboleths to tear apart the western liberal order. Last time I checked American soldiers were not being killed or wounded in European-based conflicts. Indeed the infrastructure of hospitals and bases in Germany has been critical to the military involvement in the middle east. Rather than insult and threaten why can't this guy actually lead and negotiate? Our military budget is massive and a core part of our national economy. Our alliances with allies are also critical to national security and you can't 'buy' those or bully them into existence.
9
Destroying NATO is a gift trump wishes to give to his good friend Putin. I am not sure what but I think puttin has something on Trump and that is likely why Trump avoids any strong words on him. It could be something related to the campaign or something totally different such as financial issues or women issues.
In any case, Putin’s will benefit the most from the en dos of NATO, not us.
3
If Russia is really such a tangible threat, do you think Europe will let NATO fall ahead of appeasing Trump to keep it together?
Discord among the NATO allies? Trump is accomplishing what Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev and others could not.
He has a point about European's reliance on America for its defense, but such complaints should be confined to NATO ears only.
Trump is more interested in manipulating his electoral base that doing what's good for the nation.
5
As a Canadian i can assure you 100% that if the objective is to get us and other allies to increase our spending on NATO, Trump’s approach - insults, slander, cheap shots, will have the opposite effect.
10
Good. Stand up to this demented fool.
3
Not so. Canada already agreed to stop being a laggard.
What are the chances Canada will increase spending if its GDP is trashed by Trump’s hyper-aggressive trade policies? You can’t have it both ways.
3
The U.S. out of NATO is exactly what Trump's handler, Putin, wants.
4
So Donald Trump wrote nasty letters to European governments sometime in the last month and didn't say anything about them to the American public?
Does Trump know the difference between running a smallish company and running a large, powerful nation?
No. Never mind that I asked. The answer is obvious.
4
All that can be said of Trump's behavior is that if Trump is not a Russian agent, why does he behave like one.
4
This presidency defines a national emergency.
We are abdicating our present and future prosperity to Putin without a fight.
Republican patsy patriots facilitate this destiny day by day while the rest our collective jaws drop in disbelief that no one with power will tell the emperor that he is wearing no clothes and is nakedly pursuing Russia’s interests.
Where, for example, is a joint letter from the former presidents? If they refuse to speak out, why should we bother howling into the wind.
5
Canada is a nation of peacekeepers and peacemakers, and is not nor ever will be a military power. We leave that up to you.
Oh, and we clean up your mess when called upon.
Thank you.
6
What would the grandees of the Times suggest? They don't like the tone or substance of the Trump criticism so how, exactly, would they propose to get the EU nations to carry their weight or would they prefer he just mouth euphemisms a la Obama and continue to get no result?
Trump is exactly correct to risk "blowing up" the summit if that is what it takes to get the Germans and others to step up. If they still refuse then it is an indicator that even they don't perceive the risk from Russia to be of any consequence so why should we? Once again Trump has this figured out far beyond the likes of the NY Times editorial staff to conceive of an effective policy!
3
Jim Mattis to the Brits
A little commented-on paragraph at the end of this piece reads:
“Jim Mattis, the secretary of defense, wrote to the British defense minister, last month saying he was “concerned” that the UK’s military strength was “at risk of erosion” if it did not increase spending, and warned that France could eclipse Britain as the United States’ “partner of choice” if it did not invest more.”
Wow! And I mean wow! The UK military has lost around 450 in Afghanistan since 2001; the French around 90. (For comparison – US losses have totaled 3400; Canadian 160). This is not to besmirch the memory of the dead French soldiers but doesn’t the loss of 450 British lives, to support a US initiative, deserve a little more respect from DC.
Has America now become a nation that measures allied support, not in lives given on the battlefield, but in dollars spent?
4
Semantics! It's all about semantics!
In some, just in some, Trump is right but he lost credibility and nobody trusts him anymore....
Europe may want to develop a response based on Trump's own bargaining strategies. First, tell him you are going to indeed increase military spending, but by much more than he suggests over some reasonable period of time, while praising him for spurring this action. Then increase America's required contributions equally or more and, if the US objects, eject the US from Nato, seize the US equipment, hospitals, weapons etc. that are on European soil and send the US soldiers home, replacing them with European citizens. See how we like no support for our Middle East travesty and have to refuel our air defense in Qatar. Europe gets the benefit of our military spending or our bases and equipment, they ramp up their own defense and they no longer have to depend on the whims of a tyrannical president. Perhaps a win win, until Russia invades the Balkans, when we will hopefully have a different administration.
2
I had no idea that Trump’s election could cause people to become so uninformed on this issue, and others. He is just restating the US bipartisan consensus (and NATO consensus - it is a fact) of many years. Polite diplomacy hasn’t worked, so to compel performance on the NATO treaty, direct consequences are justified. Trump is simply advising our allies of obvious past facts and future results. Never mind the mindless platitudes. We now know they don’t work. The enjoyment and wine and cheese parties of diplomats and chiefs of bureaux are not, repeat not, the main priority here. This is what many well-informed people don’t know, because they have never seen actual work done.
2
Trump has a point. His approach is wrongheaded, as always, but I agree that the rest of the free world should be spending more on their defense. I just wish that meant Trump would spend less on defense, but he is going in the opposite direction. Why should Canada spend billions more on defense when Trump unilaterally increases US spending?
2
Europe, time to tell America to go home and dissolve outdated NATO now; i.e., no US troops on European soil. WW II is over; time for you, America, to reconsider your bloated Military-Industrial-Complex, which takes money from badly needed projects at home, furthermore, deludes you into thinking military power can solve problems, when soon anyone might be able to threaten you with nuclear weapons; i.e., an outdated thinking process. At the tune of two billion dollars a day, myopic understanding at best, of being clear sighted about our future.
3
The madman's days are numbered. Biden will eat his lunch (though will probably opt for a salad instead of cheeseburger and fries) and end our national nightmare.
2
Trump is fulfilling every word of Dr. John Galtung's forecast for the US. We have u nil 2020 before Trump relinquishes our empire to god knows who, all while we transform into a banana republic with a cult personality 'leader' at the helm, one who careens from one whim to another.
4
When Don checks in with his master in July he can deliver the news that he has effectively cut off the US from allies with whom the US has had alliances for decades. He has embroiled the US in so many problems that it will take decades to fix what this fool has accomplished in such a short time. I marvel how such a stupid man was able to convince so many people to vote for him.
God save us from fools
3
The reason trump is blowing up NATO is because putin wants him too. The treacherous, racist, phony president owes putin and russia millions upon millions of dollars. Wake up people.
2
Please post links, otherwise it's just conjecture. I understand it's a possibility, but unless you have insider knowledge, you don't actually know this.
The World's Policeman. Who started this idiot contention. The United States headed up the benevolent direction in the rebuilding after the 2nd World War. Eisenhower confirmed our desire to comfort and construct a peaceful world. He warned against the possibility of a military state complex. Then Mac never returned. Korea suffered and Vietnam became slaughterhouse. Winning the war in Europe meant oil from the Middle East and there we are.
Mixed messages from The White House would make me think twice if I was France or Germany or England. The United States jerks back and forth they've got whiplash because the United States wishes to control natural resources in Africa and the Middle East and they don't want to share with Europe.
Can you believe it? Republicans think they can get a better deal with Russians who wisely bailed out Afghanistan?
Look in the mirror, you'll find the cause of all this contradiction.
4
He is one thousand percent correct. Who could even argue otherwise. These countries have gotten away with murder, paying pennies for defense, and letting the United States protect them and do all the heavy lifting. Without the United States the world would have been taken over by the Nazis in the forties, and Russia in the 50s. The world owes a debt a gratitude to the United States and the service men of this nation that can never be repayed, even now the greatest Airforce in the world protects the skies above Europe and Asia, a fact that makes the people of this world sleep a little easier at night. right now we are building new defense systems, and faster more sophisticated planes, bigger Tanks , nuclear Subs that can stay submerged indefinitely and all in the name of defense, what's wrong with Nato helping us foot the bill for production as well as research and development. Its only fair and the correct thing to do. Why should it be all on the back of American tax payers. Nato countries have universal healthcare, maybe we would have it too, if so much of our budget didn't go into defense to protect other countries that are in Harms way.
We can be the world police men, but we can also present a bill for services rendered. It's the American way.
2
This is typical of Trump: If you don't like something, don't look for the real cause. Shoot your mouth off and yell.
We're watching him at the border neither assess the problem correctly (immigration is down) nor get to the real problem (why people leave their countries). Instead, his idea is to serve an illusion by being meaner than the next guy and separating families.
Now we're watching him applying his shallowness to our relationships with our allies.
Why don't Republicans care?
2
Friends, this is one if the most known historical fact repeating by new actors again: the Trojan Horse story. In their repudiation if the black president and the woman candidate, America played into the hands of the russians and a con artist and the obvious result will be its destruction. Plain and simple history again.
5
A lot of assumptions there, Frank. You may be right in the end, but that's a lot of assumptions.
Yes, they are busy dealing with all the refugees that the US created by destabilyzing the ME.
Thank you, fool.
8
Is Russia a military threat at this point? Despite the left's attempt to portray Russia as a military threat, I don't think it is. Therefore the question becomes, what do we need NATO for? If there is a perceived threat -- perhaps China or some emerging force -- then the expense of meeting that threat should be shared equally.
I personally think the idea of a unified NATO, determined to fight for western values against any threat is a good idea. But the cost should be shared equally. Neither US nor NATO intends to colonize the rest of the world so I think it is a good idea to assess realistically what the required military presence needs to be for NATO. But if NATO is to serve a purpose it can't be the US and 26 others who aren't really that interested.
Does the rest of the world, in this case NATO have to protect the USA interests. The USA has the “power” to force its allies into wars that possibly they don’t want to support. The hundreds of USA military bases around the world protecting USA agendas, also should be financed by the nations where those bases are situated? The biggest Nation’s budget is allocated to the Pentagon, how long this would be possibly? Also, The Pentagon doesn’t need to be accountable for those funds.
1
Fake news. He didn’t write any letters, someone did it for him. They needed to come up with some words other than “sad”, “great”, or “bad”. They had to form sentences and a paragraph or two. Though he cares little about foreign affairs he does like to demand money from foreign nations, though he cannot sue them. He knows that this issue plays well with his base and is always a terrific distraction, threatening foreigners.
2
Not being gifted the with artistic abilities, I anxiously await the clever meme's and cartoons giving us insight into PM Rutte's thoughts as he placidly sits there and graciously listens to 45. Calling all artists - make my day!
Trump is just following Putin's wishes. Like a good asset (hopefully unknowing).
Sure, lets get Germany to increase their spending on their military.
What could possibly go wrong?
2
Was not Trump on TV a few weeks ago bragging about how much money was flowing into NATO from European countries? I am pretty sure this man plays fast and loose with whatever facts he invents.
2
As they say, " when Nato meets for fine wine and lots of blabber,my guess is, the Sparks will fly. Fritz runs a surplus but is at the bottom of the list with dues in the rears. Canada Norway, Belgium etc. really don't matter . Canada never spends much on their military. Great foot soldiers but that is it. Reality is of course we have one Ally, the Brits. Even Poland and of all folks Greece pay their dues.
Trump is, essentially, correct. A cursory review of NATO spending offers support to his viewpoint, and the argument is nothing new. If the New York Times disagrees (naturally), then it has an obligation to readers to explain his "fundamental misunderstanding"--not blithely offer a two word dismissal with zero substantiation.
1
Anyone else tired of all of this winning yet?
Donald Trump lived in New York City too long. Now he's running this country like a Mafia boss. "Pay up or we'll burn your company down".
I'd pay money to see NATO allies leave Donald Trump to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan alone.
2
The US seems to have this really strange idea that it is protecting everyone else. No-one else thinks this way. When did Germany last call on the US for military support? Norway? France? The notion that you are the World's police force is YOUR idea, not ours. So, if you don't like spending so much on defence, here's a clever solution... STOP spending so much on defence. At the same time you can stop complaining that it is everyone else fault but your own.
5
It's not what "we" want. Spending 2% of GDP towards defense is an obligation that all NATO members agreed to spend. Do you go to dinner with a bunch of mates with an agreement to share the meal cost and then get alligator arms when the check gets to the table?
This is what the socialists don’t get it- it works in Europe solely because they do not pay for their defense. There wouldn’t be money for free everything if European nations had to pay to prevent a Russian invasion. Someone must pay for everything.
Provoking the whole world with an apparent military build-up to conquer it isn't how Europe lives.
2
Unfortunately my fellow like minded people in NATO we have another 2 more years with this man who has no concept of what NATO stands for. It is obviously he resents NATO because it is keeping him from his Bromance with Putin. I had to laugh when he mention that it wasn't just the "Executive Branch" but "Congress" as well who is tired of NATO countries not pay their fair share. The Congress is control by the Republicans who I now consider traitors to this country. They only represents the 1% of this country, the proof in the bills they have passed, IE the Tax break. They don't represent my values and the values NATO represents. Of course we will have our disagreements with our NATO allies from time BUT fundamentally we are the same; We share the same values! The big question for me will congress change hands this fall so we can start blocking this buffoon. I don't want to impeach him since we would be stuck with Pence who is the darling of Anti-abortion movement and the extreme Right.
P.S. If anyone is wondering I am not a Democrat, I'm registered as an Independent
2
You may be an Independent, but you have no idea how to properly compose a sentence. It is an "obligation", say it slowly, "obligation" for all NATO members to commit 2% of their GDP to defense spending. However, 22 out of 28 countries are not meeting this "obligation", and have not been doing so for a long time. Please tell me what President Trump was doing long before he was elected that caused those 22 countries to shirk their "obligation".
So which is it?
"NATO is obsolete, France should pull out" OR "We need to put more money into NATO"?
Our stable genius of a president is as usual fuzzy-minded but always arrogant and sure he's right.
1
This guy, in the end, wants to weaken NATO to satisfy the wishes of his Russian boss. Putin never liked NATO, and Trump being a subservient puppet, wants to to oblige. In doing so he may get the authorization to build a luxury hotel for 'protectors' of fallen females Nevada style.
1
Since Racist 45 wants America First, then let him get rid of all the alliances, trade agreements et.al. He wants to isolate the US, then let him do so. What he will soon realize is that for all his rhetoric, reality will come back to bite him as it has already started to do. And while I love my country, it will serve it right to have let this type of thinking come into power leading to the country’s downfall.
2
Trump is definitely working in Putin's interests here. The GOP is complicit in their silence. The selling of America. Vote out GOP for change. Ray Sipe
1
Dear NATO,
Please forgive our Electoral College Mistake.
While it may act in ignorant haste, we must repent at terrified leisure.
We will rectify the situation ASAP, and ask for your forbearance.
signed,
The Majority of USA voters
Just returned from Germany where our long time allies are confused by this diabolical fool's attacks on America's friends. Trump weakens America a little more day by day by day. He is either working directly for the Russians or is so ignorant as to have no understanding of history let alone human decency or what is right and just in the world. He needs to be removed from office promptly before he can do any more damage. Then we must take steps to curb the power of the presidency so this kind of nonsense can never happen again.
1
Music to my ears. End that rancid alliance already. Threats from Russia? NATO is at its doorstep.
This 4th of July will be a kind of double celebration for many of us as we celebrate our independence from Britain and our subservience to Russia. For the many years in which we had no master, so much went wrong. Now, we can proceed through history knowing that Vladimir Putin and all of the officials at the Kremlin want but one thing: "Make America Great Again!" So, when you shoot off your bottle rockets tomorrow, aim one high and to the north in salute to Putin!
2
Trump seems to side with criminal regimes. In fact, he seems to prefer American criminals to staff his cabinet. His own family seems up to it's eyeballs in criminal lawsuits and investigations. When is America going to wake up and rid itself of this criminal cartel?
1
The NATO countries have never paid their fair share of having the U.S. military in their countries. The U.S. has always paid more than they have.The U.S. can not afford to keep spending on the defense of NATO countries and keep up the defense of the U.S..It can be done,but the U.S. deficit will just keep going up each year.Its time to get rid of some of that deficit by having them pay their far share.
What these countries need to do is evaluate what could or would occur(or even what might have)if the U.S. troops and their equipment were not there.They would most likely see that paying their fair share is a small price to pay to be kept safe.
2
Can't wait to see American influence in our region fade away thanks to Trump. Hopefully the world will become a more multilateral one, where all countries have a saying on what goes (and with a weaker American military influence in Europe that should be the case).
4
Trump wrote Merkel: “It will, however, become increasingly difficult to justify to American citizens why some countries do not share NATO’s collective security burden while American soldiers continue to sacrifice their lives overseas or come home gravely wounded.”
NATO European allies have played an important role fighting America’s “war on terror” contributing more than 13,000 troops to train local forces in Afghanistan, Iraq and to fight ISIS etc.
Every NATO country contributes to the costs of running the Alliance. By far the Allies’ biggest contribution comes in the form of taking part in NATO-led missions and operations, in which, one country might provide fighter jets, while another provides ships, equipment or troops. NATO Allies also provide direct funding to NATO to cover the costs of NATO staff and facilities, its Command Structure and its jointly-owned equipment.
At the 2014 Wales Summit, NATO Allies pledged to invest more - 2% of GDP by 2024. Over the last three years, European Allies and Canada have spent almost $46 billion more on defence, which can’t be compared to Trump’s budget, who has approved a spending plan of $716 billion for 2019. Three decades ago the US had a $270 billion budget. This excessive spending is increasingly vulnerable to an overreach. No wonder Trump is inclined to use military force to get what he wants.
Trump is tough on US allies in Europe and Asia but soft on China and Russia. This is bullyism.
6
Trump's allegations and this conversation continue without facts. The US, according to data I could find, is spending $647,000,000,000 in 2018. Russia stands at $47,000,000,000, and Germany nearly as much as Russia at $45,200,000,000, so in these terms Germany is not a laggard. The budgets of the next ten-spending countries behind the US combined amount to significantly less than the US. So this seems to me to be a political, rather than fact-based, ploy.
In short, for some reason this country sees strength only in terms of military spending or perhaps we are just plain paranoid given the many interventions in which we've been involved.
8
I suspect it is a combination of being paranoid (a post-WW II mentality), along with a belief that military spending is good for jobs and the national debt. All of which challenges the need to spend anywhere near the amount we spend.
If the Gun Cult were expunged from America, it would have a chance to become civilized.
Trump seems determined to make America weak.There are huge benefits to western countries in presenting a united front to the rest of the world, particularly Russia. Of course, weakening defenses against Russia is most likely trump's goal. I haven't figured out how Trumps gains by aligning himself personally with Putin and Russia, but I am sure all will become clear sooner or later.
4
Trump's complaining could mean that the USA is spending way too much on defense. Monies need to be diverted to social services, education, and infrastructure to bring greater stability to our economy. The facts of underemployment and people who simply cannot get a job because of lack of skills must be addressed. Peace and prosperity does not come from military spending.
12
Our national defense depends on an educated citizenry. Half the defense budget should go toward education. How much do European nations spend on education?
1
Educated people see just lies and blatant hypocrisy issuing forth from Trump's government.
In European nations, young people can go to college tuition-free.
Once again trump has gotten it wrong. The other NATO Allies do not and have not told the United States how to spend money on the defense budget. In turn the United States does not tell them.
6
If a country makes a commitment to any organization it belongs to , they should, of course, feel obliged to honour that commitment.
Are there not international agreements involving commitments to accepting a share of the world's asylum seekers? Is the US anywhere near meeting it's share of this responsibility? Perhaps each country is contributing to the world's crises in their own way.
3
If the US chooses to lead the world in military spending, so be it. But many other countries prefer not to invest so heavily in armed might in order to police - or invade - lesser powers. Canada generally fills a peacekeeping role now. Diplomacy is our current choice of weapon.
We do have a proud history of combat service when called upon to offer it, and have stood with American forces in various arenas of war. It must never be forgotten that in WWII, Canada entered the conflict in 1939. The US didn't commit to the Allies until December, 1941. More than 44,000 Canadians were killed and 54,000 were wounded in that war. We paid our dues. We have continued to pay them when it becomes necessary, although we're a much smaller nation than the US.
During the peak years of the Afghan war, through 2009, Canada lost more combatants per capita than did the US (icasualties.org). In Kandahar, our forces endured the most casualties of any single Cdn. military engagement since the Korean War (also fought side by side with the US). Ironically six of those fatalities resulted from "friendly fire" by Americans. It happens. But oh, the irony: Trump is aiming "friendly fire" at us again - yet there is no friendship in it.
NATO was formed postwar, in part, to forestall future conflict through political negotiation. The lessons of history were applied to present-day situations. Intelligence and wisdom can often count for more than military might. We desperately need these qualities now.
11
Lester Pearson's idea of the blue-beret peacekeeper and Canada's leading role in its creation certainly gave our country a unique profile.
In reality, the idea's effectiveness as an alternative conflict resolution mechanism has never really caught on; in fact, successive Janus-faced Canadian governments went out of their way to make our Southern neighbour happy - we fought with them in Korea, we went to Afghanistan and stayed there at enormous cost in life and materiel; even when we didn't send our soldiers into active combat, we still provided logistical and other support in the background; in Vietnam, in Iraq and elsewhere.
As for NATO, its role was never to 'forestall future conflicts'. It was simply a framework to make Western Europe's US military occupation permanent (the Orwellian double-speak term for that is the 'rule based liberal world order'). NATO never did anything during the Cold War. It is a corps, kept alive at enormous costs for all its members.
In its place, a Trans-European security system should be created, stretching from the Urals to the Atlantic; if the US wants to be part of it, so much better.
2
Dear Canadian friend, unfortunately your country doesn’t control the media, doesn’t have the PR machine, to send a message to the world. The USA does. I have only visited the eastern and western coast of your country. Although, I have traveled extensively, what I saw... is the huge machinery that the USA control through, media, music, fashion, movies, theme parks... Facebook, Google, Amazon, Netflix. Everyone out there... in the entire world, wants to see and personally experience the “American-way-of-life” sadly this is the case...
1
Just to quote from NATO's own site: "NATO promotes democratic values and enables members to consult and cooperate on defence and security-related issues to solve problems, build trust and, in the long run, prevent conflict." Hence my observation about forestalling conflicts, with the "in part" caveat since the intent was much broader. But it was most definitely inherent in the political section of the treaty, whether or not this intent was realized. Article 2 is aimed at peaceful resolution without recourse to arms. Sadly, this has become moot in many situations.
I'm older than NATO and was a student through much of the '50s and '60s, so I witnessed both the development of the organization and the escalation of the Cold War. NATO itself was formed, initially, for the purpose of containment in the face of a perceived Communist threat. President Truman was instrumental in the efforts to create such an alliance. It was even, informally, termed the "Washington Treaty", which says a great deal about American expectations for its implementation. The Warsaw Pact provided additional motivation to strengthen this alliance. My husband served in the Canadian Navy, which contributed to our NATO obligations. He monitored Soviet marine code traffic from a station in the Arctic c. 1958-59.
Later, I taught 20th-century history in a changed context. Adaptation is demanded now. Whether we can reshape NATO, or devise an alternative system, Trump's denigration of his allies won't help.
Hopefully NATO members will bring up US human rights abuses on the southern border.
11
Europe should tell him you are free to leave if you don't like it.
7
This guy is so tiring and boring with his constant whining about everything. You folks elected a buffoon that has no clue about what's a plan, a policy, how domestic and foreign markets work. All this guy does is to lie and lie again and claim he is the greatest at everything for all times. That's what voices in his head does to him or when you have serious mental issues not being clinically addressed. Just look at what he has accomplished: Tax cut for the rich, crumbs for the middle class, that is it, nothing else. Where's the 2 trillion dollars parked abroad that he said was coming back? Still parked abroad. Where's the steel and coal jobs he promised? Never happening. Where's his better health care plan for all? Not happening. Where are the lower drug prices he promised? Nowhere. Where's his great relationship with Europe? In shreds. Where's his great relationship with our neighbors, Canada and Mexico? In the garbage. Where's his great peace plan with NK? Only in his mind, none exist. In whatever he claims is good for America or the working class, you need to believe the opposite, facts don't lie, he does. What he has done very well is to promote hate and to divide the country like never before. In what heart and mind does someone separate families and babies and wear it like a badge of honor? Only when you have a dark heart and evil mind. For Evangelicals, who voted for him, you voted for the Anti-Christ. Nothing Christian about him. Nothing.
34
As to the coal jobs. He is trying to force people to buy their electricity from coal fired and nuclear power plants. Just look up the articles on the transmission lines they are trying to force thru. In Franklin county this will effect some 88 farmers they are threatening with eminent domain.
1
Trump's peons believe he is either the second coming of Jesus or God Himself.
1
Dear Europe,
We don't support him, and he's wrong here, as
he is virtually everywheree.
By all means, tell him to pound sand.
10
Why does the "Times" automatically buy into the notion that if the next "high-profile" meeting is a collapse Trump is the "instigator?" The same temper/resentment regarding European lip-service to a strong NATO were made by President Obama, and for good reason. This is but one expression of the "Trump derangement syndrome." Obama expressed the identical displeasure but there is not even a passing criticism. He, like Trump, was wise to raise this concern. One hears endless talk about the security of the Baltic States, and we are living at a time of renewed Russian muscle-flexing imperialism (see Ukraine). If Europeans are genuinely concerned rather than merely hoping to extent their cheap ride with the US bearing by far the greatest part of NATO mutual defense -- then it is time for these wealthy countries to pay their fair share.
6
Maybe so, Dr. But there are always a choice of methods by which to go about things and Trump invariably seems to choose the one least likely to bring him and us success.
2
Obama wasn't perfect, it just seems that way in comparison.
2
The real problem is that USA spend TOO MUCH money on weapons! The world needs less weapons and more focus on eliminating the risk of war by using diplomacy and free trade... to make all potential enemies into friends! More weapons will only increase the risk of war, while free trade and free travel between countries will make enemies into friends and eliminate the risk for war!
USA should trade with Iran..., and stop illegally starting, Iraq, and financing, Syria..., wars all over the world!
Russia, and China, should be allowed to become members in NATO! Turkey is a NATO member even though they are no longer a real democracy, and the same with Poland!
Money wasted on weapons must be used to removed the worlds dependency on fossil fuels, and to combat diseases and hunger...!
3
The excerpts from the letters sound like something that Stephen Miller would say.
It sounds to me that Trump thinks he has been appointed "Emperor of the World." Who does he think he is, Julius Ceasar? Or maybe Benito Mussolini?
Does he know that each of them came to a bad end?
4
This Leader of the Free World has really gone to Trump's head. Much like his Twitter fetish has gotten out of control. Is he so dense that he really has no idea how disliked he is around the world. No one is interested in his opinion and some of his political BFF around the world just play him. He believes the publicity that is pumped out just for him on FOX. It's a mad, mad, mad world.
6
I wonder how different the world would have been if FDR would have told Winston to pay up before they received any help in 1941? It would have been schnapps toasts in Berlin then. Now it's freely flowing celebratory vodka in the Kremlin. Putin's boy is doing a fine job!
7
He did. The U.S. was handed every single U.K. military patent and technological innovation in exchange. Things like radar, etc.
And this, of course, is what the rest of the world finds so infuriating about America and Americans. It is just so typical. Germany and Japan are, of course, complicated situations. Let's just say that it is politically difficult to talk about shared defense expenditures with the country that leveled yours, and leave it at that. But Trump is on much weaker ground with his other "allies". Is he really that unaware of the 5 years of blood and treasure Canada spent defending democracy over two world wars while the United States made encouraging noises (while raking in the profits) from the sidelines. Or that we suffered (on a per capita basis) over twice the number of casualties as did the United States. Or that the British spent themselves into bankruptcy fighting the Nazis while America dithered. And then there's the French, who were bled so white by the Kaiser that there was simply nothing left with which to fight Hitler. Scant thanks they've gotten for that from Americans, who always seem willing to talk about 1940 but conveniently forget Verdun -- if they every heard about it!
Frankly, Trump and that crew of sycophants currently running the White House had better be careful here. If people actually start to square the accounts on who's really been defending the free world over the last 100 years, America might very well find itself in the red.
7
I wish you could have heard my late father’s opinion of War in Europe. He always believed that the powers there were great at starting and waging bloody wars, but it was always poor American boys who had to go and stop them. He spoke from vast experience.
1
Trump is working overtime to undo the NATO alliance on behalf of Russia. When he meets his boss Putin he is hopping to get a "raise".
Only Trump fans who live in the closed Fox News Universe wearing their tinfoil lined MAGA caps cannot see that Trump owes more loyalty to Putin than he does to the American people.
14
Sorry he's like a old man who's obsessed in the past glory, finding hard times adjusting in a new age
6
Trump is a petty little man. Why is he always insulting our friends and praising our enemies? We need NATO and they need us. It’s about defense of the free world not about money.
10
We don’t need NATO, this war machine only serves one purpose, to alienate Russia. Why the USA through NATO always taunting Russians? Do you know that the brief war between Argentina and the UK, it was NATO that run to defend the UK’s interests and to perpetuate its imperial dominance?
First of all: run this through Google translate:
http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/bundeshaushalt-verteidigung-101.html
It says that we are stocking up by four billion Euro from 2018 to 2019. Our total expenditure for defense is at 42.9 billion Euro. We are a nation of 80 million people. I consider this well balanced.
Per capita we don't get near the U.S. spending, but on the other side the U.S. spending is nuts, more than then next 20 nations on the list _combined_.
Secondly: the increase has nothing to do with nasty, evil letters that DJT has been sending around. It has to do with the fact that he is evil, and has, in Vladimir Putin, an evil master. If Vlad wants Crimea Vlad can have Crimea. If Vlad wants all of Ukraine Vlad can have all of Ukraine. If Vlad wants Poland...
We have to increase our spending. Not because of NATO, not because of letters, but because there is a traitor in the Oval Office that won't move a finger against Russia. We are on our own. I wouldn't be surprised at all if we form new, strong alliances with France and Britain - both nuclear capable - and maybe even develop our own nukes.
As "Iron Man" once said: "If we can't defend this world we sure as heck going to avenge it!". That's the spirit these days, these dark, dark days, when Germany faces an onslaught of > 15.000 Russian tanks and no reliable partner across the pond...
4
At what point will feckless McConnell and coward Ryan say something? At what point will his mindless followers realize they were had? And at what point will have reached the point of no return?
4
Huh. I think I will see if Netflix can send me "The Manchurian Candidate" on DVD. It almost feels like we have a President in thrall to the Kremlin. Crazy, right? Insulting our NATO allies, starting flame wars over trade with Canada... Canada! Who could make this stuff up.
6
Mr Trump is obviously much more attracted by dictators, from Russia, North Korea and elsewhere. He's ready to endanger his country security just to get another 'reality' show, more and more resembling an horror show.
His inept and cruel decisions aim to affect the poor and please the rich and the racist but I'm convinced that a majority of Americans strongly disagree with the shameful mascarade of this presidency. And of course there's more: the deafening silence of the Republican Congress. To vote in November is crucial.
10
As always, doing Putin's bidding.
8
The absudity and chutzpah of Trump attempting to be the messenger who informs others about failing to pay their fair share is surely not lost on anyone who isn't severely brain damaged.
4
Trump is just following Putin's orders. Workin' toward getting Trump Towers in Moscow AND Leningrad and the Miss Teen Russia Pageant franchise for both cities.
4
After ripping children from their parents and locking them up this feels like a diversion. Or maybe by bashing everyone ahead of time he hopes Putin will take notice but must he act like a teenage girl desperate to win over the school jock?
At least unlike a toddler these world leaders can take care of themselves.
4
Has it ever been more obvious that the United States was dumb enough to elect a Russian agent as its President?
6
President Trump do us Europeans a big favor and destroy the NATO alliance. Bring the American boys back home.
3
And kill moose and squirrel!
He's not wrong.
1
Thanks for your Trumpian in depth analysis.
2
Is there anyone Trump won't attack to make him look bigger? He tweets and pontificates, and in the end it is all façade and puffery. Trump is pathetic when he is not being horrific.
11
I hate pay to play and making our troops mercenaries. Remember when the time when the GOP was about a strong military? How about when they were globalists? How about when they weren't the party of bigots, racists, misogynists, xenophobes, nationalists and white supremacists? OK maybe they have always been some of those things.
2
More trump nonsense. Puppet, yes puppet. The US Congress fell all over itself in its quest to spend one trillion dollars a year on war toys. How else do you continue to sell unneeded weapons to all comers -- require everyone to spend 2% of their GDP on weapons from our vaunted military industrial complex. #AmerikanAcceptualism
8
Have you ever gone to dinner with a large group.
One couple sits and drinks and shares the plates that are passed around.
then they are the first to leave and one or another drops a $20 on the table. which barely covers their drinks.
slowly everyone walks away, following the example of the first couple, until you are left with the bill and the tip.
After 5 decades of this you might decide to not go to dinner with this group any longer.
2
You neglect to add: before you joined the group for dinner they regularly got into bloody fights that you eventually had to stop at great expense and loss of life. Additionally in return for your coming to dinner, they let you mainly pick the menu and bought your goods so you had more to spend at dinner. After 50 years you apparently forgot all this.
I will preface my comments by saying I do not like our current president and as a centrist Republican I no longer have a home in this right wing disaster of a party. That said, I served in the US Air Force in the 1990s and deployed several times with NATO. It was extremely clear that the US shouldered the vast majority of NATO efforts and that the European countries could have shouldered much more of their own defense. Several countries seemed almost lackadaisical in their efforts. However, I was impressed that the Norwegians were actually quite serious about national defense and flew aggressively on their coast hunting Soviet subs. So of course there is a strong element of truth in the need for our partners to shoulder more of the burden. But as any leader should know, a hammer should not be your only tool to achieve an important goal. It risks getting what you want at the cost of a broken alliance. I worry that his actual goal is to weaken our alignments and readjust Europe towards my Russian influence. History would tell us that is a very bad idea.
7
How can allowing a foreign power to maintain a military presence in your country be considered taking advantage? There are U.S. military bases across Europe and throughout the globe, a constant deterrent against military action. The only country that benefits from a diminished U.S. presence in Europe is Russia, whose long term goal is to reclaim the Soviet empire.
5
"The Trump administration has already reportedly been analyzing a large-scale withdrawal of American forces from Germany,"
Putin:Perfect... I can start grabbing back some old Iron Curtain satellites
5
The NATO countries should expel us. They have more to fear from us than Russia.,I'm sure Europe can form an alliance with Russia to their mutual benefit. It is important to the world that we be isolated. We have morphed into a societal pathogen.
Europe and Russia unite. Japan and Southeast Asia unite! You have a common enemy the USA.
July 4 approaching ....a national day of mourning for our high crime of kidnapping 2000 children and separating them from their parents. Many may never be reunited.
7
We really need to dump this president, before he sells us out- to the Russians.
That is, if he hasn't done so already.
10
How many Intel secrets will Trump share with his buddy, Putin when they have their one-on-one this month?
4
Putin's boy....doing Russia's bidding by undercutting NATO.
How wonderfully "American" of you trump.....
9
Who is now in control of the NYT's Picks? All these postings about how the European's are using U.S. Taxpayer dollars to feel secure while America pays the bills should read some history books. Are these very same people not concerned with a trillion and a half dollars in tax breaks for corporate America while our infrastructure crumbles? There are more subtle ways to compel our NATO allies to contribute more. The purpose of NATO was to keep the countries in Europe in check militarily so we wouldn't have to return to that continent a third time. Some 60 million people died in WWII. How many will die if we abandon NATO and Putin decides to get aggressive again. He has a history with that in Georgia and now the Ukraine. So this petty, shallow and mercurial man elected in the U.S. with only 77,000 votes should undermine 70 years of comfort and peace in Europe and alienate the very people we rely on to keep that peace for a few dollars at a time when we elevated our own military spending to historical levels? Those who fought in Europe and paid the ultimate price are spinning in their graves. When everything becomes about the money the very principles that made this nation great is degraded and we lose our moral authority on the global stage. Exactly what Putin wants. For a few dollars more in NATO support we secure millions of lives. That's the point. This is not a pay for protection racket as Trump is suggesting with his threats of leaving NATO. Wake up people.
6
He hates liberal democracy and is trying to destroy it all over the world, and especially in Western Europe. Allies, hang tough, because most Americans hate this President. We are with you, not him.
11
What a sad thing to boast of - “most Americans hate”. Terrible sentiment. I don’t give the president the power to fill my life with hatred. I don’t respect him that much. Boasting of your hatred for him does nothing to actually elect Democrats; it’s exactly his game. He doesn’t give one iota what people feel about him. Let’s win elections and keep our souls unscathed.
The text below the photo in this article states that Mark Rutte is the PM from Denmark. Well... he's not. Fortunately, mr. Rutte is PM of The Netherlands!
6
And still crickets from the GOP...
5
'Warning' your friend means you no longer have a friend.
6
I have served in the military in the NATO theater. The US must purchase even its dormitory furniture for our troops from Germany by law. We have thousands of retired German cjvil servants bei g paid by the American tax payer. The NYT is not doing a good job reporting the actual US cost for the European defense.
4
Pull All the troops out of Europe, Africa, Middle East, Japan, and South Korea. Bring our soldiers back to U.S.A!!!
4
Trump is like the unhappy spouse in a relationship where he works and his wife stays at home. He thinks he's being used by his wife who raises the kids, takes them everywhere, tends to their every need, prepares meals, and puts in at least as much hours if not more than he does. What she doesn't do is feed his overblown ego and cater to his every demand which infuriates him.
He covets the sexy but selfish and dangerous woman he barely knows. She wants to posses him and devises plots to blow up his marriage. But he goes along because he's a selfish child who doesn't value his wife. He has tantrums at the dinner table and skips the school play. He arranges meetings with the woman who plays to his ego and lies about how great he is.
Trump wants to blow up our world and replace it with dangerous liasions. And he's taking the free world with him.
8
Honestly, a little over two years left?
Who cares what this mean and stupid man has to say about virtually anything?
I read articles like this and chuckle.
Fifty years from now, which is a blink in the course of time, historians will describe this as four years when a buffoon was in charge.
9
Canadian’s should spend more to protect themselves from … USA? Two oceans, not another country on earth with the navy to invade them.
Wait that is also true for USA, real question is why USA is spending so much on defense, Texas has enough guns to stop Mexico, and we can just say NO when Canadians politely ask if they can take over our country; or tell them to come through Detroit & Chicago if they insist.
We are preparing to fight Star Wars against ET, when American middle class is disappearing and working people live in their cars in big cities.
Where have we spent our bload and $$$$ since end of cold war?
Afghanistan rearranging rocks with $100 M rockets fired from billion-dollar plains.
Iraq! Based on a lie, doing our client states biding to fight their wars for them? They do through great parties and have quite few Trump towers, of course they grease both sides and all the think tanks.
EU should do the same, they just don’t spend enough to be ready to fight ET. They give their people free health care, good public transportation and government services, and Vacation time! What if Americans ask their government for the same thing, OMG.
14
"while American soldiers continue to sacrifice their lives overseas or come home gravely wounded,”
I am disgusted by that comment from Trump. American soldiers die because of the stupidity of old white American men in positions of power in your country, and because of their complete lack of understanding of the world.
If you want to stop American soldiers dying, Trump, try stopping negative American meddling in the world. It was you people who created the mujahadeen of Afghanistan, who went on to morph into al qaeda and kill your people in the World trade centre on 911. It was you people who morphed your second war in Afghanistan into a war in Iraq and converted Al qaeda's operatives into ISIS. Europe had nothing to do with it and is not responsible for America's stupidity.
10
Duh. And that stops when these other countries take up their share. It isn't cutting them off, it's making them pick up their responsibilities. Then we can leave them to do their part. See how that could work?
So you're offended by the statement. Ok. As for the rest of your diatribe, isn't Trump advocating reduced "American meddling" by wanting a reduction in U.S. troops abroad via NATO?
If America didn't wage so many silly, brutal and unnecessary wars, military expenditure wouldn't have to be increased. Why should NATO allies have to finance these often stupid overseas operations?
17
Why doesn't trump just resign the presidency, gather up his reprehensible family , and move to Russia. Let Putin have him. Trump would probably be gone in a year or two after Putin's had his fill of the lyin' stable genius. Death by poisoned cheeseburger. Oh, yes, take Pence too.
17
Most of military spending is going back to US companies which make a lot of money. Also Europe did not ask the US to go to war against Irak where f billions have been wasted as well as american lifes. No lesson to take from Trump on this matter.
10
it's time for our CIA to leak the dirt Putin has on Trump.
He will get us into a war with Europe for god's sake.
9
That won't happen.
Whatever! 62% of White men voted for this anti-intellectual, misogynistic, and racist dum dum. why? Who knows?
The old gray white men wanted a return to the good old days. The rural dwellers wanted no immigrants and a crazy government.
So we are back to the new Jim Crow, with a twist. This time it is Jim Crow with a heavy dose of Russian manipulation of our country.
Trump is more Putin than Putin.
Welcome to the new shriveling up of America by Donald John Trump Putin. :(
5
2 1/2 more years of this Trump ignorance & idiocy...we can survive.
6
I don't believe the rest of the world spends to little, I believe we spend to much! Maybe if our dear leader stopped supporting Russia and dictators around the world and started to support our allies things might be different. Trump really seems determined to make life very hard for Merkelrd . Is that because she has a hart while he doesn't?
11
Heck, we might even spend "too" much...
What? Europe not paying for its defense was going on well before Trump became president
Or else what? Since when did the idiot in the White House become king of the world? Americans better realize that sovereign nations do not respond well to ugly threats. Canada alone has done more peace keeping missions than almost any nation on earth; and has done so since basically creating this force in the U.N. many decades ago. Of course someone as ignorant as Trump would be clueless about such matters. He may bully the G.O.P.; the rest of the world is not impressed.
7
Surely the Pres should be delighted in being Number One, he should be showing commitment and a cohesive message for NATO .... BUT OF COURSE being Putins stooge / lapdog / debtor and with an inverting destructive mindset he will trash anything of value that enters his view.
Its obvious who he aligns with, who are his 'friends'.
trump must not be allowed to create any wars whatsoever, Mr Unstable!! There are some very repugnant dirty old white men pulling his strings.
7
There are complex reasons why some countries spend smaller amounts on their military than others. They include international agreements made with Germany as conditions of their post 2nd world war loans about how such money could and could not be used. For example - no investment in nuclear weapons. The result has been a country rich enough to offer sanctuary to a million refugees from war zones. The most dis-heartening recurring theme in all of this is how the current POTUS views all relationships as transactional. There is no one in Europe asking the US to invest such enormous amounts of money in increased military spending. What we want is respect from an friend. America expected our support after 9/11. It got it.
10
I don't see any evidence our NATO allies would suggest the U.S. spend less on our NATO obligations. Nor do I see any of them disagreeing with our assessment of their investment versus ours. Just once I'd like to see this kind of article provide some concrete facts about the spending equation. Then maybe we wouldn't have as much political commentary about what Trump said and what his detractors said.
3
(No, I am not a Trump supporter)
The other NATO countries have consistently failed to meet their defense spending commitments and Trump is not wrong to call them out on this.
But he does it in a way that is almost certain to fail and his timing is incredibly horrible. (Both of these failings are to typical of Trump.)
6
I'm so glad he is making this point. The Europeans keep spending their defense dollars on social programs, shifting their defense burden to the USA. Meanwhile, we have people over here who could use some social program spending, too. Maybe it's time for the Europeans to not take six weeks of vacation each year and work a little harder to provide for their own defense.
2
Trump is searching for a way out of NATO and creating it. Europe will withdraw from participation in US endeavors in Iraq and other places. Putin loves this. Compare the withdrawal from Europe with the lack of support for Japan and the Pacific rim. Trump is simply playing with toy soldiers and mystic maps. I wish the Congress would conduct a review of where our troops were deployed outside the US and the relationship between our safety and the deployment.
2
What I don't understand is how spending more on one's own military contributes to NATO's budget? What's the link and how does the increases in U.S. military spending affect NATO spending? Shouldn't we decrease spending on our military to force Europe to spend more on its?
2
What exactly is trump's end game? He has a pattern of taking problems that we expect a president to manage like border security, NATO contributions, trade issues, and blows them up into full fledged crises. It seems his whole life has been spent nursing personal grievances which he now has the power to address globally and with extraordinary ignorance and malice.
There is more to this issue than NATO "dues". His disdain for democratic governments is chilling. I'm starting to think that Putin doesn't have anything on trump; trump merely admires him because he favors autocratic regimes.
6
I don't see any of those applauding the president on this presumptuous, public tantrum mention that we are paying for our military adventurism, on top of "defending" a list of countries, which by the way, in this era almost always comes with a self interested, economic imperative, such as oil.
Further, criticizing Trump's approach while endorsing his actions is disingenuous. The two are intertwined. His impulse to bully and "instincts" positing that the rest of the world is looking to rip us off are projections of a paranoid personality. Combined with profound ignorance on almost every subject pertinent to the presidency, infatuated with strong men and surrounded by extremists of every stripe, makes him in my view much more dangerous to both our and the world's security than our allies.
4
As a Finn, living next to Russia, I'm shocked to see so many NYT readers complaining about Trump on this issue. You really must hate him so much that it clouds your own thinking?
NATO is a common enterprise that benefits all it's members. Therefore is is only natural that everyone should pay their proper share.
If Finland once decides to join, we won't be free-riding.
3
The US is free riding on Carbon emissions reduction from Europe, particularly Germany. A much greater threat to our national survival.
2
Ike and Dylan were right.
The Masters of War, they lie and deceive.
6
Today's truth, too, in Dylan's "God on Our Side."
Do Trump supporters really want to see Germany fully militarized again? Be careful what you wish for.
5
Well I'm not a Trump supporter, but I'll take a stab at your question. I think Trump believes that Belgians' fears about a revamped German military (or Russia) may cause Belgium to cave on not providing more resources to NATO, lest the U.S. abandon it. Whether Belgium is already providing a "fair" amount or not is really beside the point. Trump thinks he can get "more".
From someone in the UK, there is an argument for NATO countries to review their national defence spending ( although it would seem that they are keeping to their bargain of paying their NATO dues) - and it's a point raised by POTUS. However, as usual, his tone and choice of words leave a lot to be desired.
That he appears to be in awe of these international 'strong men' dictators and continues to lambast the historical allies and friends of the US worries me. Western democracies would be wise to hunker down and wait for 2020 and change of president and governing party. The GOP's silence and refusal to see how dishonourable this man is reflect badly on it to the point where trust in it as a party and its representatives has evaporated.
Make your case as watertight as you can Mr Mueller.
1
The US will leave NATO and join the Russian Federation in joint defense against Europe and its democratic allies. Russian will send troops to the US northern and southern borders to help bolster our defense from invasion of those murderous hordes who's only purpose is to murder Americans as they sleep in their beds. God bless the Soviet Union (Oopps! I mean Russia). They are doing God's work.
2
Mr. Trump will go to the NATO meeting and badger, bluster, threaten, and insult because this is how he operates. Hey, it works for real estate deals so why not? And he may even pull the U.S. out of NATO, mostly to prove "how powerful" he is and let European countries feel his strength.
His good friend Mr. Putin will of course love this, and knows to shower Mr. Trump with approval and give the appearance of being a real pal. Then with NATO no longer an issue, Mr. Putin starts annexing other nations. Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania will go first. Then a couple of Eastern EU countries the EU doesn't like anyway.
Mr. Trump will find a way to approve of Russia's moves while continuing his efforts to make America a 2nd rate nation.
1
NATO was founded in 1947 as a transatlantic alliance to check the power of the Soviet Union. It had 12 original members: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Turkey and Greece joined in 1952, West Germany in 1955. Today it has 29 members.
The letters sent to Canada, Norway, Belgium, Germany and others member nations by this White House sound as if they were written in the Kremlin, by the Kremlin for the Kremlin.
It's seems clear we will witness a deliberate tantrum at the July NATO meeting, followed by a preening performance with Putin - the mental image for which perhaps is that of Benito Mussolini on a balcony, arms smugly crossed, head nodding in affirmation of the roar of his crowd.
11
Misleading headline....should read "Trump Again Notes That Allies Fail to Meet Agreed Defense Spending Obligations, Citing Burden on US."
3
While many past presidents have talked about EU paying more for NATO, and there could be a seasoned discussion on that topic. I am not sure Trump's way of approach is right. Also folks supporting need to understand that total Military spend of USA is not only on NATO, we have expenses all over world. I saw some folks comparing % GDP between USA and EU, hence saying thats wrong way of comparing.
3
The main point being how effective those earlier presidents discussions actually we're considering the current situation. At some point someone has to push the situation to effect a change.
Europe is the second largest economy in the world and makes up the vast majority of NATO outside the US. President Obama chided NATO members to meet their treaty obligations and spend the two percent of GDP on defense. NATO members ignored, very politely, President Obama.
Why is it these very wealthy countries should be exempt from paying their fair share.
5
The 2% is not considered an obligation so much as it is a target or guideline. It’s also somewhat arbitrary. Also, Trump is presenting it as though Europe and other members of NATO are getting some kind of free ride. That’s not the case at all. The fact the US chooses to spend as much as the next 7 nations combined on its military is its own choice and it derives great geopolitical benefit from doing so. It doesn’t mean the US is somehow being taken advantage of.
The bottom line is that NATO is the most important counter to Russian aggression and expansion. Without NATO drawing that line in the sand Russia expands.
Is Russian expansion good for US security interests?
Again, just to be really clear, the US doesn’t fund its military in order to protect its allies. It does it to project American influence.
3
You're getting caught up in the truth. The only fact that matters is that Trump believes he can get more out of NATO by threatening to pull out. It remains to be seen whether his belief is accurate or not.
If Trump wants to affect the behavior of the world leaders he shares the 'world stage' with he should lead by example.
How? By informing manufacturers in our nation, ones he continues to brow beat to make their products here in our nation and not over the border, he will begin to invest in the building of factories here in America that will be responsible for the creation of goods with the Trump Brand. Period. End of story. No excuses.
Trump simply has to have goods with the Trump Brand produced in factories here in America. Then, I believe, he can expect to be treated as an equal and not the blowhard he shows himself to be with his inaction in this matter.
5
If the point of getting NATO countries to spend more on defense were so that the US can spend less, that would be terrific. But there's no way a Republican will ever propose a smaller US military budget. I can't imagine how anyone inside or outside the country can trust anything this president or this whole party says.
9
Where did this arbitrary "2%" number come from? Why not figure out what is needed militarily and then make a budget based on that?
4
It’s in the NATO charter and was agreed to by all members. Trump is now trying to enforce it, as he said he would.
The brilliance of Vladimir Putin must be admired. He realized that there was nothing he could do, by himself, to make Russia great again. The world had left Russia in the dust. He looked at the aftermath of World War II and so how the US took a world in disorder and turned it into an opportunity to take world leadership. Our enemies, Japan and Germany, became our allies. The US currency became the currency of the world. English became the business language of the world. America was great.
Then Putin figured out that the way to make Russia great again was to destroy the world order and remake Russia as the restorer of world order. He saw Trump as the missing link: the egomaniac who would destroy the US if it would make him (Trump) more adored and (likely) richer. He (Putin) manipulated the US democratic electoral process to ensure his man won the election. He saw the Republicans as accomplices who craved power so much that they would put their own reelections ahead of the best interests of their countries. He created refugee crises to hurt US allies in Europe (see NYT article - today - on Angela Merkel). He has now turned the US against its staunchest allies (G7, NATO).
Putin's plot is brilliant in its audacity and has been brilliantly executed.
There is only one force that can stop his plot before it succeeds: We the people. And time is running out.
12
Trump is laying the groundwork for abrogating on NATO. He doesn't need Congress: as Commander In Chief he'll simply order US troops to 'stand down' as Putin's tanks roll westward (with Trump's approval). No increased military investment by the other NATO countries will actually satisfy Trump because his pro-Russia strategy is already set. NOTWITHSTANDING, all other NATO members need to immediately increase - hugely - their defenses for their own sake, because Trump & Putin are planning to roll over them. And to minimize the amount of military info shared with the U.S. because Trump will leak it all to his pal (& possible paymaster) Putin. (Whether Putin has blackmailed Trump is almost irrelevant because Trump is a natural fan & ally of Putin anyway.)
5
Trump, as almost always, confuses things to bend them to his liking.
NATO is a defensive pact by nature. The only time Article 5 was invoked was in the wake of 9/11 - invoked by the USA and the NATO allies came to help.
All those costly military adventures the USA have been involved after WW II, i.e. in Iraq & Afghanistan, have nothing to do with NATO.
Not one American soldier has shed a drop of blood in battle under the realm of NATO on European or Canadian territory since WW II has ended, so this portion of Trumps narrative is as wrong as it could be.
Trump, and unfortunately many US commentators over here, are ignorant about how NATO is funded. This is not a club where members pay (or underpay) membership fees. Every NATO member pays as much and as little it wants to appropriate for its domestic defense budget. There is indeed a commitment to increase this allocation to 2% of the GDP by 2024, but that is all there is (and it is not 2024 yet either).
If the US wishes to withdraw from Europe: so be it. They are not there to fulfill any commitments under the NATO doctrine in the first place. They are there to protect the interests of the US to be able to engage in military confrontation globally (this ambition is unrelated to NATO!). So by no means those US forces are protecting helpless Europeans (UK and France do also have nuclear weapons) as some may believe. So if the US want to leave Europe, leave (please).
4
Are the Balkans not in Europe? Did the United States not contribute the vast majority of resources in stopping the ethnic cleansing there?
Mr.Trump- news flash- you are no longer running Trump Inc.The dollars flowing to the bottom line from your business partners is not paramount.A strong European Union aligned with our interests is more important.Stop shaking down our European partners and restore our most important alliance.You are doing what Mr.Putin hoped for whether you know it or not.Mr.Mueller will tell us if this is or of a plan.
4
Just like a mob protection racket. Pay up or we will burn down your business. America is the world's main aggressor fomenting discord and disarray in other countries so American multinational corporations can pillage the resources on the cheap. Besides that, it is not that our allies spend too little, it is that America spends way too much but that, after all, is exactly what should be expected from the most aggressive country in the formerly free world. This is not "spot on" as many have written. It is dangerous to manipulate the word into greater military presence. After all, what could go wrong with that?
3
Look there has been a generational change, this is not the post war baby boomers. We are for socialism, abolishing ICE and eventually abolishing all national borers. Only when the world answers to a single world authority will everyone be on equal footing. I'd like to write more but I ordered some Chinese take out and the Keeping up with the Kardashians is starting. I will write more revelations about how the world should be after the show.
They need to meet their agreed on terms of defense spending. Wy is that so difficult for everyone to understand?
4
Because there are no agreed on terms of defense spending.
The 2% is simply a guideline, countries can choose to spend more, or less.
America spends more not because it has to, it spends more because it wants to.
1
Donald Trump has never paid a bill in his life; and, he is complaining about NATO not paying up?
10
Ok, Trump prepares to meet Putin. So, he renews his criticisms of NATO!
How totally obvious this is in showing what a puppet he really is to Putin.
6
I can't wait for those same countries to reply that they're going to start charging the US market rates for all the US airbases and military facilities on their soil. Outrageous that the US has been taking advantage of them all these years. Enough is enough!
11
I guess a stopped clock is right twice a day. I am tired of paying to protect nations that are putting less of their economy into defense and can as such afford social programs.
My vote is for Europe to pony up a lot more for NATO and for the US to stop wasting trillions on stupid and useless wars, such as the ones we keep pursuing in the middle east.
Then we could afford to staff and train a military AND feed poor kids! Imagine.
We cannot allow some nations to run roughshod over others - North Korea cannot be allowed to destabilize the who Pacific rim, and Russia cannot be allowed to annex useful chunks of other nations. But that doesn't mean that America needs to shoulder the greatest share of the cost.
And if we considered the possibility of limiting our military, we might stop sending Americans off to die for no apparent or realizable purpose.
5
The only national security risk is Trump.
5
It seems this is a precursor for his meeting in Helsinki. Instead of hugging the American flag, the real picture is of Trump dreamily hugging the Russian bear.
5
Our so called allies siting at our shoulder instruct us to follow them by paying for their defense needs and opening our markets for their goods, but criticize us for asking their fair share of defense cost and to open their markets by reducing tariffs. Do we need allies who just want to use us for their advantage? They may want to keep us away from Russia and to have tension with Russia to use it for their advantage. Trump sense that there is something wrong with such a scenario. So he wants to have good relationship with Russia and it will be good for us and other NATO countries.
1
"If they chose not to protect themselves - they can pay the consequences. "
This and similar posts show a fundamental problem with the new isolationism/pro Russia stance the US is taking. Putin is working to bring Russia back to it's once lofty status. This means appropriating directly or indirectly other countries that have something he wants. Be it direct force of arms or supporting "rebels", Russia is expanding it's influence in the Baltic states.
This is not a good thing and the US actually does have a stake in not going along with this. Unless we think that's o.k. and it will not impact us directly, then all bets are off.
The overall pivot by DJT against any and all of our allies along with the embrace of repressive dictatorships is not a course we want to be on. Trump has signaled repeatedly that he'd like some of those repressive policies here as well.
The consequences will be ours to pay.
5
Good. I’m sick of paying taxes to defend our deadbeat friends while I have to struggle to find decent health care let alone pay for it. Meanwhile Europeans enjoy their universal healthcare, month long vacations, tightly controlled work hours, job protections, and every other benefit you can name. They are able to do this and exist at the same time because they don’t have to defend their sovereignty. They know we will do it for them.
3
Surely you do not think that our allies increasing their defense spending will result in the US government and US corporations in providing US citizens with the social benefits of universal healthcare, month long vacations, tightly controlled work hours and job protections you cite. There is nothing preventing the US from providing these social benefits other than greed; the fact that don't have them is a value choice to fund the military-industrial complex over social benefits
6
All of that and more should be ours but the billionaires keep it from us.
1
Maybe so but that's beside the point. They and we can choose our own social priorities but I don't want to pay for theirs.
Fine. Let all the NATO countries close down our bases on their soil, Germany having the most of them, and send those thousands and thousands of troops home with nothing to do in peacetime. Oh, wait, then Trump can start a war to use all those extra troops but we will not have any of those countries standing shoulder to shoulder with us, we will not have air bases in those countries, nor hospitals to treat our wounded. Yeah, let's go it alone.
10
This article, like so many in the Trump era, is missing crucial context. I count on the Times to provide background and counterpoint, and this article only has one or two passing links to other articles for context.
Where is the presentation of the European perspective on this story? Without a summary of the European commitments Trump claims are not being met, it's impossible to be fully informed as to the legitimacy of his complaint.
The Belgian PM says he is "unimpressed." Is this supposed to serve as a summary of the European position on this issue?
Americans on the whole remain embarrassingly underinformed about foreign policy, and this article demonstrates why.
14