Donald Trump, front runner of America’s Republican Party and prospective president of
the United States, is widely known for his controversial speeches during political campaigns.
However, when it comes to being one of the two people to end up leading a global superpower, words go beyond shock value and attention-grabbing techniques.
This rule of thumb seems to have passed Mr. Trump by when, on the 10th of February, at
an election rally in South Carolina, he decided to discuss his view regarding the North-Atlantic Treaty Organisation (also referred to as NATO). Trump noted how he would advise Russian President Vladimir Putin to militarily invade any country failing to invest 2% of its GDP in national defense. This widely disputed argument brought about a series of opposing reactions from political figures across Europe and America alike, raising the question of the States' willingness to defend the organization's members.
To begin with, why is this speech so concerning to the world? After all, Donald Trump
has maintained throughout his 2016-2020 mandate a reluctance to promote and be involved in NATO activities, choosing to opt for direct relations between member states and America.
However, since 2020, a harsh and bloody war has broken out in Eastern Europe, dividing the political East from the West more than ever before. This historical event put emphasis on the importance of America's support in Europe, highlighting the power of NATO. With a prospective American president implying the support of further Russian invasions, the European security landscape alongside America's political stance was questioned.
In the final analysis, should or should we not fear the consequences of Mr. Trump's
claims?
Firstly, the current American president, Joe Biden, alongside NATO’s Secretary General,
heavily criticized Trump's claims regarding the position of the United States in world affairs.
Submitting a bill to send supplementary aid to Ukraine, Biden aimed to reinforce America's
position as Russia's opposing power.
Consequently, the President has cited Article 5 of NATO's Charter, emphasizing that an
attack on any member state poses a threat to all, requiring appropriate responses. As long as America remains a member of NATO it will abide by the statutes enforced by the charter,
therefore being unable to support any Russian invasions.
Lastly, following the death of the Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, the United
States Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, accused Moscow of murdering the political prisoner.
In light of recent events, this statement confirmed America's approach to the actions of the
Russian Government. Therefore, the speech of Donald Trump had little to no relevance regarding the American stance in International Relations.
However, it is not implied that such a controversial and public statement will go
unnoticed and will not bring about any consequences. On the local scene, republican senators took note of Trump's arguments, engendering obstacles to the passing of the aforementioned military aid bill. All in all, the republican party now has a brand new set of arguments to bring up during the political rally.
What about the external reactions? Europe's response to the statement was a cautious one.
Instead of accusing America and its prospective president, the European leaders, gathered at the Munich Security Conference, chose to discuss the ability of the European joint power to defend itself and the steps to be taken from the inside to strengthen its security.
All things considered, this new approach of Trump to international relations, deeply
rooted in shock value, will certainly influence the outcome of the American elections as well as the cooperation between member states of NATO and the United States of America.
Bibliography
s-out-of-nato-would-he/article_18dc48bc-9c78-59a5-b243-7b19cb61db4b.html
paign-biden
-america
russia-to-attack-nato-countries-who-dont-pay-bills
n-russia/
Yorumlar