← Back to context

Comment by Kinrany

5 hours ago

Undermining article 5 is the goal, so NATO needs to figure out how to invoke it gradually.

One thought is to pretend to not know that it's Russia, and invoke it against an "unidentified adversary".

Nobody actually wants to invoke Article 5. The European countries talk a lot, but they don't actually want to do anything serious.

Macron famously said that he would "have to send troops to Odesa" and yet 3 years later there are still no French troops in Ukraine and Russia has captured even more territory and is now actively bombarding Kyiv.

The reality is that, despite their public statements and posture, every leader in the EU secretly hopes USA can broker a peace deal and this all just kinda goes away.

  • > The reality is that, despite their public statements and posture, every leader in the EU secretly hopes USA can broker a peace deal and this all just kinda goes away.

    This might've been the reality three years ago. A lot has changed in the US in the last three years.

    Nobody wants to invoke article 5, I do agree. But I think they might understand that it's more likely that A5 is invoked than the US brokers a peace to with anybody. They're the department of war now.

  • > The reality is that, despite their public statements and posture, every leader in the EU secretly hopes USA can broker a peace deal and this all just kinda goes away.

    100% agree.

This isn’t new though, and Russia has conveniently provided the west with exactly the avenue to respond. Just further increase support to Ukraine, and make it clear that further sabotage and really anything unfortunate that happens will result in even greater support.

In fact, Russia should be investing heavily in ensuring that nobody else goes asymmetric against NATO countries.

  • Most of the west is already helping Ukraine as much as we can within the current budgets (which have already increased a lot over a few years ago - the "peace dividend went away).

    Anything more means countries go to war time funding of some sort. Would you accept if the law made buying or working on video games illegal for the duration - that is everybody currently making a video game now has to switch to working on something military related.

    I just pulled the above example out of my head randomly, there are plenty of other "non-essential" jobs that could switch to making bombs, shells, tanks, airplanes... (either manufacturing or engineering).