French far left enshrines leaving NATO in official presidential platform – POLITICO
www.politico.eu

Archived copy is here: https://archive.is/DqZ6m

The article says this:

“Immediately withdraw from NATO’s integrated command and then, in stages, from the organization itself. Reject the tribute demanded by the United States of 5% of GDP devoted to defense spending,” read France Unbowed’s 222-page program.

However, France under Mélenchon would still provide assistance to European Union countries under EU treaties, the document added

Is Melenchon right? Is it better for the EU to be the organisation of mutual defence guarantees for Europe, rather than NATO?

  • DupaCycki@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3·
    4 hours ago

    Even in a best case scenario, where the US is fully invested into supporting NATO, unlikely as it is, NATO as a whole remains unreliable.

    The Article 5, which is supposed to be the security guarantee of all members, doesn’t provide any guarantees at all.

    This assistance may or may not involve the use of armed force, and can include any action that Allies deem necessary to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

    https://www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/introduction-to-nato/collective-defence-and-article-5

    Core part here - “any action that Allies deem necessary.” This can be literally nothing, if a country deems nothing is necessary. There are no minimum requirements when it comes to supporting a member invoking article 5.

    As opposed to Article 42(7) of the Treaty on European Union, which legally binds all member states to do everything in their power to support a member that got attacked, who doesn’t even need to explicitly ask for it first.

    This clause provides that if a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States have an obligation to aid and assist it by all the means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations.

    https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/mutual-defence-clause.html

    Unfortunately, this only helps EU countries. Although it could potentially be extended to other close allies like Canada or the UK. That remains to be seen.

    It’s also nowhere close to a full ‘guarantee’, especially due to all the American assets rotting the EU from within, but it’s still more meaningful than NATO ever was.

    At this point, I can’t quite comprehend why ideas of leaving NATO are still sometimes seen as extreme. The US is the evil guy. NATO is its own alliance. By supporting it, we quite literally are the baddies. There already exists an alternative, at least for 84% of NATO member states, and potentially coming for more.