NATO 2% Pledge is a Matter of Global Security

Introduction

The United States (U.S.) is an important ally to Europe and plays an indispensable role in NATO, but weaponising it like Donald Trump did illustrates why diversity is very much needed in the alliance. Like much else, Trump misunderstands foreign policy and the nature/purpose of the NATO alliance.

As with much foreign policy, the Republican front-runner radically misunderstood the nature and purpose of this relationship. NATO is not an alliance based on dues: it is the largest military bloc in history, formed to face down the Soviet threat, based on the collective defence that an attack on one is an attack on all — a principle enshrined in Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty.

It’s purpose which suits the US profoundly: The White House invoked Article 5 after 9/11. And since NATO’s creation, the US might have been often packaged globally as the expression of a dozens-strong consensus. NATO helps bolster the US’s ebbing position as the sole hyper-power. Strip away this vast alliance, and its diplomatic and economic might, and the US looks quite lonely on the world stage. In short, the US will almost certainly always spend much more than anyone else on its military, regardless of its allies. NATO gives it a global bedrock of legitimacy, and support for the dollar, and the post-Soviet hegemony it thrives upon. As a Cameroonian living in Africa, I refrain from writing about these global issues. However, part of me thinks they are consequential enough for us to ensure that…