Donald Trump’s festering hostility toward NATO has taken a hysterical turn of late, with the president expressing outrage that U.S. allies refused to participate in his misguided war in Iran.

At her latest briefing, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt shared a direct quote from Trump, saying members of the NATO alliance “were tested, and they failed.” Speaking for herself, the president’s chief spokesperson added, “It’s quite sad that NATO turned their backs on the American people.”

Leavitt was describing an imaginary foreign policy landscape. In reality, the U.S. launched a war of choice for reasons the White House still hasn’t adequately explained, and there is nothing in the NATO charter that requires members to participate in unnecessary military conflicts just because the American president wants them to.

If the American people had been attacked, NATO members would’ve been there for us, as they were in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. But that’s not what happened. Indeed, as recently as March 17, more than two weeks into military operations, Trump explicitly argued in writing that the U.S. did not need NATO’s assistance.

Hours after Leavitt’s briefing, Trump met privately with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, and The Washington Post reported that the Republican “appeared to hold back on Wednesday from taking dramatic action to reshape the U.S. relationship with NATO after a high-stakes meeting with its top leader.”

The meeting was soon followed by an all-caps missive published to Trump’s social media platform that read, “NATO wasn’t there when we needed them, and they won’t be there if we need them again. Remember Greenland, that big, poorly run, piece of ice!!!”

This was, for all intents and purposes, juvenile gibberish — though it was an odd reminder that Trump believes NATO is to blame for standing in the way of his desire to seize the arctic island for reasons he also hasn’t explained in any meaningful way.

But perhaps most important was The Wall Street Journal’s report on the Republican administration’s plans for the alliance, which would fall short of full withdrawal. From the article:

The White House is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that President Trump thinks were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.

The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of North Atlantic Treaty Organization member countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and stationing them in countries that were more supportive. The proposal would fall far short of President Trump’s recent threats to fully withdraw the U.S. from the alliance, which by law he can’t do without Congress.

The Journal’s report, which has not been independently verified by MS NOW, added that the White House is intent on “punishing” NATO and that this plan “has circulated and gained support among senior administration officials in recent weeks.”

For roughly the past eight decades, the U.S. military has stationed tens of thousands of American troops at bases across Europe. If the Journal’s report is correct, Trump and his team envision a plan in which they reposition those troops away from countries that annoyed the White House and into countries that didn’t annoy the White House.

It’s not altogether clear what Trump thinks this would achieve or what strategic objectives this might accomplish. And there’s a potential wrinkle that stands out. From the Journal’s article:

Countries that could benefit because they are viewed as supportive include Poland, Romania, Lithuania and Greece, the officials said. The Eastern European countries have some of the highest defense-spending rates in the alliance and were some of the first to signal they would support an international coalition to monitor the Strait of Hormuz. After war broke out, Romania quickly approved U.S. requests to allow its bases to be used by the U.S. Air Force.

The plan could result in putting more U.S. troops closer to the Russian border, an outcome likely to antagonize Moscow.

In other words, Trump’s plan to punish NATO might very well lead to a troop buildup near Vladimir Putin’s backyard, which the Russian leader wouldn’t like. It makes me wonder whether any of this is likely to actually happen, since Trump is usually eager to make Putin happy.

Watch this space.

The post On the future of NATO, Trump eyes a weird alternative to U.S. withdrawal appeared first on MS NOW.

Author: Source Author

From MS Now.