2024 Presidential Candidate and former President Donald Trump recently remarked that he would not defend NATO members if they did not meet the 2% minimum GDP spending sending cries of outrage throughout America and the NATO alliance but how big of a deal is it?
A fair statement or over-the-top?
Alliances or friendships however you view NATO in theory should be mutually beneficial to all parties involved. Perhaps the most beneficial advantage of being in NATO is Article 5 which in basic terms means an attack on one member will be treated like an attack on all members. In 2024 war and the threat of war are ever so prevalent around the globe so making sure defense is top-notch is becoming more important by the day as war still rages on in Ukraine and the Middle East at the time of writing this piece. In everyday life, there are penalties for not making minimum dues that regular people must face. You could get kicked out of college for not making the minimum grade, be evicted for not making the minimum rent, face dangerous conditions for not meeting minimum safety and so much more. Is it really that unreasonable that the penalty for not making the 2% minimum be that the global superpower United States does not have your back? Perhaps it opens the door for opportunities like Russia to invade NATO countries that don't meet the minimum. Perhaps it is tough love in an effort for countries to make their dues. NATO has not been happy about the former president's statements, but why are Americans upset?
Who needs who
It's no secret that the US has been struggling with its problems since post-pandemic. A drug epidemic, housing crisis, border crisis, and natural disasters such as Maui none of which have been properly invested in to make American lives better. War in Ukraine and war in Israel have been bleeding away billions of dollars of taxpayer money billions of which could have been invested into the US. Maui could rebuild, New York City could handle its migrant crisis without cutting budgets to areas that matter most to people, and drug rehabilitation could become a real treatment and yet the money goes to countries that take advantage of the US like NATO. This may be a biased statement I'm about to make but it seems like European nations get to live incredibly good lifestyles like great public transportation, great education, great healthcare, no drug epidemic or horrible crime rates and it seems like they can invest in all those great things because America can handle their national security for them. I am not a fan of Donald Trump nor am I a fan of the current political climate but it doesn't seem that unreasonable to make those kinds of statements that Donald Trump made. Anyone but Trump could make those same statements and receive less outcry from it. The United States is a global superpower that is more than capable of challenging any foe or alliance on its own. Strategically there are about four countries to which the US would give its undying support: England, Australia, Israel, and Taiwan. America would never abandon England or Australia, Israel is the foothold America needs in the Middle East and Taiwan is the home of the vast majority of semiconductors imported and used in some of the most advanced technologies at the American disposal. Strategically speaking the most NATO could provide America is simply manpower, manpower America can use instead of its people. On the flip side, NATO needs America's might and industrial complex. The main adversary and strategic target to continental Europe is Russia and whilst NATO could defend and most likely win a Russian invasion even without the US it would come to great harm to continental Europe. Most countries in the NATO alliance lack an industrial complex that could continue to supply the frontline in times of war. NATO would vastly rely on American industry and logistics to supply the front line. Without America, supplying a war would be incredibly difficult and incredibly damaging to the population especially if war leads to a prolonged stalemate like the current Ukraine-Russia war which Russia would likely win a war of attrition or at the very least bleed continental Europe dry.
Takeaways
So what should you take from this? Whatever your opinions may be or which side you choose, think on this issue and discuss it with people you feel comfortable discussing this matter with whether you support Donald Trump's statements or not. Talking and thinking about these things is how we develop and improve as a society.