President Trump met with Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the Netherlands on Monday in the Oval Office. In letters sent last month, Mr. Trump demanded that NATO allies spend more on their own defense.CreditDoug Mills/The New York Times
New York Times: In Pointed Letters, Trump Demands More Defense Spending From NATO Allies
WASHINGTON — President Trump has written sharply worded letters to the leaders of several NATO allies — including Germany, Belgium, Norway and Canada — taking them to task for spending too little on their own defense and warning that the United States is losing patience with what he said was their failure to meet security obligations shared by the alliance.
The letters, sent in June, are the latest sign of acrimony between Mr. Trump and American allies as he heads to a NATO summit meeting next week in Brussels. It will be a closely watched test of the president’s commitment to the alliance after he has repeatedly questioned its value and claimed that its members are taking advantage of the United States.
Mr. Trump’s criticism raised the prospect of another confrontation involving the president and American allies after a blowup by Mr. Trump at the Group of 7 gathering last month in Quebec, and increased concerns that far from projecting solidarity in the face of threats from Russia, the meeting will highlight divisions within the alliance. Such a result could play into the hands of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, who is to meet with Mr. Trump in Helsinki, Finland, after the NATO meeting, and whose primary goal is sowing divisions within the alliance.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: The office of Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau leaked their letter from President Trump over a week ago .... Trump warns Trudeau on lack of defence spending ahead of NATO summit (iPolitics). What is my take. What good is an alliance when many members do not want to contribute promised levels of defense spending or keep their armed forces at a readiness level that is more than symbolic. And while many are saying that President Trump is undermining NATO .... I say the opposite .... he is trying to save it. That is why it is easy for me to predict what is going to happen at this year's NATO summit. Presdient Trump is going to raise the issue of defense spending, and many of these leaders are just going to mumble or make excuses. This is not a winning issue for them, so expect them to focus on other topics.
More News On President Trump Demanding More Defense Spending From NATO Allies
Trump slams 'underspending' NATO allies ahead of key summit, warns WTO: 'We will be doing something' -- FOX News
Trump reportedly demands NATO allies increase defense spending in harshly worded letters -- Washington Times
Trump demands NATO allies increase their financial contributions -- The Hill
Trump sends letters to NATO allies demanding more defense spending -- Axios
European powers nervous ahead of Trump tour -- Chris Doyle, Arab News
7 comments:
Let’s look at NATO current capabilities.
Germany can’t fly its fighters because too many of them are unfit to fly and pilots have lost their combat ratings as a result.
Germany’s navy is unfit to sail for lack of repairs due to lack of funding.
Britain can’t sorte its destroyers for the same reason as Germany. British troop strength is lower than anytime over the last 300 years.
Britain’s new aircraft carrier has no anti sub escorts.
British PM May so far is refusing extra funds to the MOD.
Contrast this to the USA reinforcing NATO by following armor back to Europe. Contrast this to Europe’s $150 annual trade surplus.
This is a perverse situation that won’t last except in fantasy land.
Justin has 400 million to send girls to school (non Canadian) but no cash for our vets or NATO..... what a joke of a prime minister. This has to end.
Certainly perpetual war footing has lost its appeal for many countries in spite of major war mongering on the part of the US. If Canada had been more war liking following WW II would we have universal healthcare? I don't think so as the money would have been spent elsewhere.
Ask the American people if they would rather keep spending money they don't have on war or get universal healthcare and perhaps better infrastructure, and for sure better education.
NATO is the bulwark against wars of the past. The next war will most likely end in a week along with humanity.
Rather odd that comments do not deal with the issue. The issue: How great a percentage of NATO costs borne by US? How much pledged for future costs (percentage) by NATO nations? all the other stuff does not deal with the issue at hand
Fred,
I agree!! As to how much the US should bear, how much allies should bear, etc. is a matter of debate that reasonable can and will have. Personally I think the US is bearing to much of the costs while "allies" are bearing to little. POTUS thinks these allies are not bearing enough of the costs. I happen to agree with him. European allies think they are bearing enough of the costs. Perhaps they think they are bearing to much.
POTUS wishes to renegotiate this. The "allies" do not. Frankly, I think the relationship is so one-sided against the US that unless these "allies" adopt more reasonable positions the US will have no choice but to withdraw from NATO. I see huge upside potential in such a situation. 1.)We finally get to bring our people home and/or to properly deploy them in ways that actually make sense for our defense needs and in ways that actually advance our interests. 2.)This should help our relations with Russia and should help us to solve outstanding issues with them. 3.)The cost savings would be enormous. 4.)These cost savings then could be put into things like infrastructure development, school lunches, healthcare, the social safety net etc.
Basically I recognized the problem with NATO years ago and would have moved long ago to get us out of it. POTUS and his team have chosen to try and save it. The case can be made for keeping it and specifically to confront Russia. Unfortunately, if it is to be saved, "allies" are going to have to commit more to it or America will have no choice but to withdraw. In other words, the pundits bleating about POTUS trying to destroy NATO are either disingenuous or they do not understand basic economics.
I think European allies would probably come to their senses on this were it not for visceral hatred for president Trump. Since I don't think this is going to happen, withdrawal from NATO is probably our own viable option. As anon points out in the first post, this is a "perverse situation" that cannot continue.
Bob,
I don't think it is the "perpetual war footing" that EU nations have a problem with per say. I think they want the benefits of NATO membership along with the American largess that goes along with it without having to pay a reasonable price for receiving such things. Now point out ingratitude shown by Europeans to Americans and the parasitic nature of the current relations with them and American support for withdrawal from NATO would probably increase substantially.
Your visceral hatred towards America is obvious. If these nations and their leaders truly feel the same as you do, I would suggest they go ahead and withdraw from NATO right now. Save us all the trouble.
B. Poster: I have no hate for America but I take issue with a bully who claims to the victim when it goes out of its way to destabilize other countries for no justifiable reason other than when it perceives opportunities for cold war positioning, resource gain and eternal WIC profitability and all this at the expense of the well being of its own citizenry.
Post a Comment