• jj4211@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    Well, ‘NATO’ as defined today can’t exist if any NATO member attacked another one, just from how the organization is defined as it is, that wasn’t a possibility it was defined to be capable of handling.

    A “just like NATO, but not specifically NATO” that excludes the US I could imagine forming soon enough for it to be essentially an equivalent thing.

    But knowing politicians, they had better have drafts of what that specifically should be ready to go, because politicians might just take forever to settle details of what should be a straightforward arrangement. For example, reworking it so that removing a member is actually defined, and that accepting a new member does not require perfectly unanimous agreement.

    • Kissaki@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I would imagine NATO would exclude the USA and remain as it is. IIRC, Trump spoke of leaving NATO in the past as well, so he’d be happy to sell it as his own.

      I assume such efforts have not been made yet because the USA remains an important member on paper, because of its military, as long as it has not taken that action yet, and because politicians hope that Trump’s term will end with a shift back to cooperative politics.