US Exit from NATO?

[Valmy]

I think we're all mostly talking past each other...the core issue is that those who authored the system (arguably this can said for all liberal democratic institutions) didn't expect a totally corrupt and ethically bankrupt Executive branch to align with a party that is totally corrupt and ethically bankrupt in control of the Legislative branch.

In this case, that just leaves the weaker Judicial branch nothing to do but fight a partisan delaying action until the next elections.

I guess we will see if Congress can do anything about it if the Dems win in November.

[mongers]

Interesting podcast about Iceland's defence dilemma:


In Iceland's Defence

Iceland is one of the few nations without a national military. Its security relies on international alliances and a civilian defence force. Is this a sustainable strategy?

Iceland is an island of great beauty and even greater strategic importance. Its position in the Greenland Iceland UK Gap, the gateway between the Arctic and Atlantic oceans, makes it crucial to Nato operations in the High North.

But Iceland is one of the few nations in the world with no military of its own. A country of approximately 400,000 people, its security relies on the umbrella of protection it derives from being a founding member of NATO, a bilateral agreement with the United States signed in 1951 and a highly skilled coast guard and police force. In a climate of fracturing political alliances, is entrusting national defence so heavily on the guarantees of allies a sustainable strategy? Sandra Kanthal travelled to Reykjavik to find out.

[viper37]

This is almost funny.

Exclusive-Pentagon email floats suspending Spain from NATO, other steps over Iran rift, source says

WASHINGTON, April 24 (Reuters) - An internal Pentagon email outlines options for the United States to punish NATO allies it believes failed to support U.S. operations in the war with Iran, including suspending Spain from the alliance and reviewing the U.S. position on Britain's claim to the Falkland Islands, a U.S. official told Reuters.

The policy options are detailed in a note expressing frustration at some allies' perceived reluctance or refusal to grant the United States access, basing and overflight rights - known as ABO - for the Iran war, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe the email.

The email stated that ABO is "just the absolute baseline for NATO," according to the official, who added that the options were circulating at high levels in the Pentagon.
One option in the email envisions suspending "difficult" countries from important or prestigious positions at NATO, the official said.

Asked whether it is possible to suspend a NATO ally, a NATO official said that "NATO's Founding Treaty does not foresee any provision for suspension of NATO membership".
'THEY WERE NOT THERE FOR US'

President Donald Trump has harshly criticized NATO allies for not sending their navies to help open the Strait of Hormuz, which was closed to global shipping ‌following the start of the air war on February 28.

He has also declared he is considering withdrawing from the alliance.
"Wouldn't you if you were me?" Trump asked Reuters in an April 1 interview, in response to a question about whether the U.S. pulling out of NATO was a possibility. 

But the email does not suggest that the United States do so, the official said. It also does not propose closing bases in Europe. 

The official declined to say whether the options included a widely expected U.S. drawdown of some forces from Europe, however.

Asked for comment on the email, Pentagon Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson responded: "As President 
Trump has said, despite everything that the United States has done for our NATO allies, they were not there for us.

"The War Department will ensure that the President has credible options to ensure that our allies are no longer a paper tiger and instead do their part. We have no further comment on any internal deliberations to that effect," Wilson said.

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SEES EUROPEAN 'SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT'

The U.S.-Israeli war with Iran has raised serious questions about the future of the 76-year-old bloc and provoked unprecedented concern that the U.S. might not come to the aid of European allies should they be attacked, analysts and diplomats say.

Britain, France and others say that joining the U.S. naval blockade would amount to entering the war, but that they would be willing to help keep the Strait open once there was a lasting ceasefire or the conflict ended.

But Trump administration officials have stressed that NATO cannot be a one-way street. 
They have expressed frustration with Spain, which has also irked the U.S. administration with its refusal to hike defence spending to 5% of GDP, adamant that it can meet its obligations with less. The United States has two important military bases in Spain: Naval Station Rota and Morón Air Base.

POLICY OPTIONS

The policy options outlined in the email would be intended to send a strong signal to NATO allies with the goal of "decreasing the sense of entitlement on the part of the Europeans," the official said, summarizing the email.

The option to suspend Spain from the alliance would have a limited effect on U.S. military operations but a significant symbolic impact, the email argues.

The official did not disclose how the United States might pursue suspending Spain from the alliance.
"We do not work off emails. We work off official documents and government positions, in this case of the United States," Spanish Prime Minister Sanchez said when asked about the report ahead of a meeting of European Union leaders in Cyprus to discuss topics including NATO's mutual assistance clause, adding that Spain was a "loyal partner" to NATO.

Even if legally unenforceable, a public threat to suspend Spain from defensive support would be "gravely damaging" to the alliance and further damage trust between Europe and the United States, said Sven Biscop, professor in European defence policy at Belgium's Egmont Institute and Ghent University.

"Already, most European leaders are no longer confident the U.S. would support them in every crisis ... What Trump is doing makes no sense for America's interests," Biscop said.
FALKLAND ISLANDS

The memo also includes an option to consider reassessing U.S. diplomatic support for longstanding European "imperial possessions," such as the Falkland Islands near Argentina.
The State Department's website states that the islands are administered by the United Kingdom but are still claimed by Argentina, whose libertarian President Javier Milei is a Trump ally.

Britain and Argentina fought a brief war in 1982 over the islands after Argentina made a failed bid to take them. Some 650 Argentine and 255 British service personnel died before Argentina surrendered.
Trump has repeatedly insulted British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, calling him cowardly because of his unwillingness to join the U.S. war with Iran, saying he was "not Winston Churchill" and describing Britain's aircraft carriers as "toys."

Britain initially did not grant a request from the U.S. to allow its aircraft to attack Iran from two British bases, but later agreed to allow defensive missions aimed at protecting residents of the region, including British citizens, amid Iranian retaliation.

Addressing reporters at the Pentagon earlier this month, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said "a lot has been laid bare" by the war with Iran, noting that Iran's longer-range missiles cannot hit the United States but can reach Europe. 

"We get questions, or roadblocks, or hesitations ... You don't have much of an alliance if you have countries that are not willing to stand with you when you need them," Hegseth said.
(Reporting by Phil Stewart; additional reporting by Inti Landauro and Victoria Waldersee in Madrid, Lili Bayer in Brussels; Editing by Don Durfee and Edmund Klamann)

[The Brain]

The US is already threatening war on Nato, and has been for quite some time. The US appears unable to keep up with its BS.

[crazy canuck]

Probably more a case of the US believing its BS.

[Duque de Bragança]

US Moves against Spain and the UK?
Assuming the US stops diplomatic support of British imperial possessions, that means implicit support for Spain, cf. Gibraltar.   

[crazy canuck]

I am pretty sure MAGA supporters will not understand much of that post, be able to locate Gibraltar on a map, or Spain, or the UK.

[Sheilbh]

US Moves against Spain and the UK?
Assuming the US stops diplomatic support of British imperial possessions, that means implicit support for Spain, cf. Gibraltar.   

The US wasn't particularly helpful in the Falklands - Reagan's Administration was very divided with Haig and Kirkpatrick broadly sympathetic with a Latin American fascist junta. Cap Weinberger and the DoD were more supportive.

The key ally actually was - as you'd expect given it's another country with imperial possessions (e.g. the largest exclusive economic zone in the Pacific) was France. Mitterrand was a crucial ally, providing intelligence, stopping sales of French arms to Argentina (and some other Latin American countries who might pass them to Argentina), providing technical details about French weapons like the exocet that they'd sold to Argentina and providing public support while the US was still engaging in futile "shuttle diplomacy" (of course, ironically, the UK had actually been trying to get rid of the Falklands in the 70s ).


Even now it was French ships that deployed to the Eastern Med and have been helping protect both Cyprus and the UK bases in Cyprus.

Obviously there is also a fundamental hypocrisy/contradiction in the US position around imperial possessions. The UK did the deal with Mauritius over the Chagos Islands because of US concerns under the Biden administration and then re-iterated in the early days of Trump's second administration. They're now complaining about the deal and basically trying to collapse it so Britain keeps its imperial possession. One might almost say the primary goal is just to kick up a fuss for the sake of it.

[viper37]

I am pretty sure MAGA supporters will not understand much of that post, be able to locate Gibraltar on a map, or Spain, or the UK.

[grumbler]

(snip) One might almost say the primary goal is just to kick up a fuss for the sake of it.

Disagree on "almost." One of the goals of MAGA is to ensure that no one, inside the US or outside of it, trusts the US government.  Hence the appointment of an unbroken string of morons to every government position that they can.

[Duque de Bragança]

US Moves against Spain and the UK?
Assuming the US stops diplomatic support of British imperial possessions, that means implicit support for Spain, cf. Gibraltar.   

The US wasn't particularly helpful in the Falklands - Reagan's Administration was very divided with Haig and Kirkpatrick broadly sympathetic with a Latin American fascist junta. Cap Weinberger and the DoD were more supportive.

The key ally actually was - as you'd expect given it's another country with imperial possessions (e.g. the largest exclusive economic zone in the Pacific) was France. Mitterrand was a crucial ally, providing intelligence, stopping sales of French arms to Argentina (and some other Latin American countries who might pass them to Argentina), providing technical details about French weapons like the exocet that they'd sold to Argentina and providing public support while the US was still engaging in futile "shuttle diplomacy" (of course, ironically, the UK had actually been trying to get rid of the Falklands in the 70s ).


Even now it was French ships that deployed to the Eastern Med and have been helping protect both Cyprus and the UK bases in Cyprus.

Obviously there is also a fundamental hypocrisy/contradiction in the US position around imperial possessions. The UK did the deal with Mauritius over the Chagos Islands because of US concerns under the Biden administration and then re-iterated in the early days of Trump's second administration. They're now complaining about the deal and basically trying to collapse it so Britain keeps its imperial possession. One might almost say the primary goal is just to kick up a fuss for the sake of it.

Well, the US had to choose between allies, happened in 1974 in Cyprus.

For once, Mitterrand was almost crystal clear in his support, notwithstanding this imbroglio :

In 2012, it came to light that while this support was taking place, a French technical team, employed by Dassault and already in Argentina, remained there throughout the war despite the presidential decree. The team had provided material support to the Argentines, identifying and fixing faults in Exocet missile launchers. John Nott said he had known the French team was there but said its work was thought not to be of any importance. An adviser to the then French government denied any knowledge at the time that the technical team was there. The French DGSE did know the team was there as they had an informant in the team but decried any assistance the team gave: "It's bordering on an act of treason, or disobedience to an embargo". John Nott, when asked whether he felt let down by the French, said, "If you're asking me: 'Are the French duplicitous people?' the answer is: 'Of course they are, and they always have been".[190

English wiki on the Guerre des Malouines.  Also referenced on the French wiki.

P-S: rediscovered the Falkland's War thanks to the sole British Falklandsploitation movie.

[Duque de Bragança]

I am pretty sure MAGA supporters will not understand much of that post, be able to locate Gibraltar on a map, or Spain, or the UK.

Who needs a Morón (support) base when you have a Maga (support) base. 

[Sheilbh]

English wiki on the Guerre des Malouines.  Also referenced on the French wiki.

P-S: rediscovered the Falkland's War thanks to the sole British Falklandsploitation movie.

Interesting looking up the source on that as seems to have been a relatively recent discovery:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17256975

In his memoir, before that information and at the time, worth noting John Nott referred to France as Britain's "greatest ally" in the war which it absolutely was.

[The Minsky Moment]

The US is already threatening war on Nato, and has been for quite some time. The US appears unable to keep up with its BS.

One hand doesn't know what the other hand is doing.

Not that it's hard to figure out.  They are both up the ass, searching for the missing head.