Summary

NATO allies informally discussed deploying troops to Greenland after Trump threatened military action to seize the Danish territory.

Germany and other European nations explored possible responses, including invoking NATO’s Article 5, though it was ruled out due to US veto power.

Denmark pledged $1.5 billion to bolster Arctic security, while NATO considered expanding its presence.

Trump cites strategic concerns over Russian and Chinese influence and US missile defense. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte acknowledged Arctic security needs but sought to defuse tensions.

  • Chainweasel
    link
    fedilink
    English
    503 months ago

    Germany and other European nations explored possible responses, including invoking NATO’s Article 5, though it was ruled out due to US veto power.

    And this is the only reason why Trump didn’t pull the US out of NATO.
    Because of the veto power, he can effectively block them from taking action against the United States.
    NATO is dead.
    If other world leaders had half a brain between them, they would be forming a new alliance without the United States as we speak.

    • @CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      53 months ago

      Yes, a new military alliance and other new non-US Western treaties needs to happen. Badly.

      Although, he’s saying he wants 5% spending from all members now, so maybe he’s still planning to “shoot himself in the foot” by leaving.

      • @CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        NATO has no provision to remove members. It’s even worse than the EU where a single other member is enough to veto it.

        Stop doing that, Western leaders. 3/4 vote should be enough for anything.

        • @thisismyname@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          173 months ago

          We’re seeing from the White House that written words, rules, and laws are meaningless to them. They’re only a permanent member because words say so, and the members are willing to honour those words. If the USA were to attack another NATO member I’m sure those words can and will be ignored.

        • Pennomi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          113 months ago

          They could reorganize as “NOT-U” under all the same terms but without the US.

      • @cygnus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        153 months ago

        The EU doesn’t include the UK, Canada, Norway, or Turkey. It isn’t really a good NATO substitute.

    • Nougat
      link
      fedilink
      43 months ago

      “We’ll make our own NATO, with blackjack and hookers!”

      • @Gsus4@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23 months ago

        That was the CSTO and Armenia says the only good thing it had was the hookers…

    • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      73 months ago

      There’s nothing stopping them from just ignoring the veto of the country they’re worried about…