DISENGAGING AMERICA: NATO

The Western world is divided into two camps on how or even why to disengage from the Unites States. On the one hand you have Japan and S.Korea, both seemingly determined to rely on American protection against China. This they believe they can get away with because the US focus on the Chinese as Enemy Number One will need their participation to be viable. Therefore they believe they can rely ion the US nuclear weapons based in S.Korea and at American bases in Japan.

Europe+ however has quite a different problem. The nations who face Russia have been told by Washington to look after their own interests – while at the same time the Americans seem reluctant to to let them get on with doing what they believe to be best to defend themselves against Russia – namely supporting Ukraine. It no longer suits Washington that Russia be classed as an enemy because they want to peel Russia away from China, seemingly unaware that that’s not going to happen. The new US régime seems bewildered as to why Europe+ has become so stridently anti-Russian, opposed to Washington’s world view and so adamantly pro-Ukraine. It may be beyond Trump and Vance but it’s not beyond Rubio, who says whatever he has to to keep in office – but I know for a fact this is straining every sinew of his conscience. He doesn’t believe this crap he’s spouting, but he knows he’s got no wiggle room. He’s watched and monitored by Trump loyalists installed in the State Department. He’s strapped in so tight only his mouth works. I suspect far more tightly and more heavily supervised than even he expected.

The Americans are looking for leverage over Europe, and their control over the operational aspects of NATO is one, along with the nuclear weapons sharing program. As we recently discovered in Senate hearings, one doesn’t work without the other in the view of the US military. They have their own agenda. The senior generals are trying to preserve the architecture beyond the 2028 elections in the hope that they can just go back to normal. By then it will be too late. It’s already too late in my opinion.

Meanwhile the fundamentally more ideological Vance camp are planning to withdraw the US from Europe because they see it as a waste of time and they don’t want to be defending liberal democratic ideas and what they see as socialist states. They are happy to see SACEUR withdraw and they’d happily remove the nuclear weapons from Europe.

The other camp, which is not driven by Trump directly but from his acolytes in the White House who steer his worst impulses, is far more transactional and inclined to leverage its position with both SACEUR and the tactical nuclear weapons, and sees holding on to senior posts in NATO as a means of retaining a veto on what Europe might do.

Take the example of a Russian incursion into Finland, an Article 5 issue, that they can then effectively veto if they felt like it, because all must agree that Article 5 has to be enforced. That would throw NATO into chaos, not just by declining assistance but wreck the command and control structure it depends on. The Americans would be the spanner in the works. It wouldn’t stop allies coming to Finland’s aid, but it would be in spite of NATO command rather than with it. That is not a scenario anyone wants to play out. This is why it’s vital that America leaves Europe+ and NATO and NATO is re-invented without American nuclear weapons or commanders.

What Happens When Article 5 of NATO Is Invoked?
Collective Defense Principle
• Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty establishes the principle of collective defense: an attack against one NATO member is considered an attack against all members.
• When Article 5 is invoked, each member state agrees to assist the attacked ally by taking “such action as it deems necessary,” which can include the use of armed force but is not limited to it.
Process of Invocation
• The North Atlantic Council, NATO’s principal decision-making body, must agree that an armed attack has occurred and that it falls under Article 5s provisions.
• Once agreed, NATO members coordinate their responses, which can range from military action to other forms of support, such as intelligence sharing or logistical aid.
Nature of the Response
• The wording of Article 5 is intentionally vague. It does not obligate members to deploy military forces automatically; rather, each member decides what measures it considers necessary in response.
• Responses can include military action, but also diplomatic, economic, or logistical support

As you can see from the invocation process – the US could quickly obstruct NATO doing its work if it chose to. As it holds the SACEUR position it is in charge of the European military across NATO and its nuclear forces. What if the current SACEUR won’t stand down or aside for his deputy (usually a British officer, currently Admiral Sir Keith Blount of the Royal Navy), and he blocks cooperation on instruction from Washington?

This then brings us back to the use of nuclear weapons in Europe. Under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty between the US and the Soviet Union, which became open to other signatories in 1968, a secret deal was hashed out that wasn’t initially made public. The origin of that deal was Soviet paranoia over Germany being able to use nuclear weapons of its own free will. This they were opposed to so much, that the US agreed to a deal on “Control”. The US would permit the sharing of its nuclear weapons with other NATO members but it would not let them control their use without American permission. The Soviets of course were never letting any of their satellite states that much freedom of action. Since 1995 when this ‘deal’ became public there have been constant calls for the US to stop the sharing arrangement which almost every non-NATO signatory (most of the rest of the planet except those with nuclear weapons already), has said is just proliferation by other means. You can see their point but it’s been opposed by the US and has never changed.

The Americans ever since have been owners of the distributed weapons and custodians of the nuclear control systems that enable their use. However, in the event of war SACEUR can transfer the control of those weapons to the individual nations. This remains the reason for example, that Germany maintains its aged Panavia Tornado IDS fleet and is anxious to replace them with F-35’s.

These weapons are few in number – more than sufficient to be honest at 120, but when Russia has some 2,600 it seems minimal. It’s only minimal until you’re on the receiving end.

Imagine now, a scenario where an American SACEUR refuses to turn over the PAL (permissive action link) to the allied powers when a nuclear strike becomes necessary? The consequences could be devastating for NATO forces.

America as it stands has vast power over NATO operations, command and control, intelligence sharing and it still for now, has large numbers of forces theoretically committed to European defence. Would it simply let them sit idle and do nothing?

If it reaches the point that this happens, then European allies face fighting Russia alone, with difficulty, and with one hand tied behind their backs.

For as long as there remains doubt about America and its position regarding Russia there cannot be a situation where it is allowed to remain in a position of strength in Europe.

I find this a staggering conclusion, one in all of my life and career I would have resisted relentlessly. Yet what other choice do we now have, we must face reality and take a leap of faith into the future. I see where this will end if we don’t and if we do, and the later is a vastly more preferable outcome.

America can no longer be trusted under the current régime. This afternoon I watched as a well known American commentator made a coded statement that the military in the US were now the only means of changing the situation. They were the ones who swore their oaths to the constitution and that Vance and Trump would have to be removed within 18 months. Nobody else can do it.

Even if that remains a fantasy – its less of one now that its ever been.

Europe does have the means of fighting Russia and as the years wear on and rearmament takes effect, it will be even stronger and even more capable. But it cannot function as NATO should function with the United States supplying the commanders and the tactical nuclear weapons, along with the full command and control system. America should be encouraged to leave. It should be asked to stand down and move away.

It will bring about a feeling of self reliance Europe desperately needs to make its capability a reality. It cannot just be the EU no matter how much it would like that to be. It must be NATO without America – it must the EU, Britain, Turkey, Canada, Iceland and Norway. Countries like Italy will oppose it, Poland won’t much like it, because they both have a vision that goes back decades, of the America that was. Migration from both countries into America in the 20th Century and late 19th was enormous, they have deep ties at an emotional level. They must abandon them. No pleading with the Trump régime will change its mind. It’s a toxic, anti-democratic cancer we don’t need. Even if Trump/Vance were removed and the current Congress disbanded and a revised, tougher constitution with steel guardrails installed that corrected the myriad of failures that exists now, it will never be the same.

It was a moral decline that took America to where it is now, a willingness to believe lies, a willingness to flaunt the rules and laws which required decency and honor to work. Once that was gone, the law made to seem irrelevant as it is now, with the Supreme Court ruling on due process – an astonishing 9-0 vote by Justices who suddenly realized what they had let loose, is being ignored. It’s not even been a 100 days and the world, let alone America is no longer the same.

Things are going to get worse. America is heading towards a major crisis and whoever wins out will determine its fate for a decade or more to come. Europe+ has to get out from under this before it happens.

America must be asked to leave NATO. Now.

The Analyst

militaryanalyst.bsky.social