WHAT TRUMP IS REALLY ASKING NATO

Today, US President Donald Trump heads to the annual NATO summit in Brussels, and his counterparts are bracing for a storm. Trump, breaking with seven decades of US policy, has questioned the value of an alliance that is overwhelmingly supported by American cash and troops. What exactly, he wonders, is the US getting by paying for all of this?


Leaving aside Trump’s impetuous style – the question isn’t really a new one. After all, what is the continuing relevance of an alliance that was born more less when Trump was? For 42 years after its founding in 1949, NATO had a clear and singular mission: to defend Western Europe from Soviet expansionism. Full stop.

Then the USSR collapsed, and the alliance struggled to refashion itself, variously as

A Western security umbrella for former Soviet bloc countries eager to escape Moscow’s sphere of influence for good (this, of course, greatly annoyed Russia)

A counter-terrorism alliance (9/11 was the only event that has ever triggered NATO’s collective defense clause)

A vehicle for US-led multilateral military action in places such as the Balkans in the 1990s (clearly successful) and, later, Libya during the Arab Spring (perhaps less so).

Each of those missions had its merits and drawbacks, but neither individually nor collectively did they constitute a coherent vision for NATO’s continued existence. Instead, US belief in the alliance’s worthiness as an instrument of US power carried it along. Trump’s break with that assumption has thrown the question of the alliance’s purpose into sharper relief than ever before.

What are some possible ways to revive NATO’s purpose? Perhaps there is a (back to the) future option for NATO as a bulwark against fresh Kremlin efforts to assert Russian influence along the former Soviet fringes. Perhaps NATO could be refashioned as a cyber-power alliance that can focus on the coming conflicts of the 21st century. Or is it enough that NATO, along with other institutions like the EU, has kept an unprecedented peace at the heart of a continent that, until 1945, had seen centuries of nationalistic and sectarian bloodletting?

As Trump arrives in Brussels, his NATO counterparts will not only need to have good answers about what they are prepared to pay – but also what they, as members, are prepared to do to make the alliance worthwhile and relevant in the 21st century.

The Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace launched in 2018 with the commitment of signatories to stand up to cyber threats like election interference, attacks on critical infrastructure, and supply chain vulnerabilities. Last week, on the first anniversary of the call, the number of signatories has nearly tripled to more than 1,000 and now includes 74 nations; more than 350 international, civil society and public sector organizations; and more than 600 private sector entities. These commitments to the Paris Call from around the world demonstrate a widespread, global, multi-stakeholder consensus about acceptable behavior in cyberspace.

Read More at Microsoft On The Issues.

In recent years, Republicans have come to dominate most of the state legislatures in the US. Ironically, it was during the Obama-era that the GOP made major headway in states that had long been considered safely blue. State legislatures are now redder than they've been in nearly a century, and in most parts of the country, one party holds all the levers of power. For the first time since 1914, there's only one split legislature in the entire country: Minnesota. To be sure, some state races are bucking the trend: Kentucky and Louisiana, both deep-red states, recently elected Democratic governors. Here's a look at how Democratic and Republican control of state legislatures has evolved over the past four decades.

Forty years ago, Islamic extremists angry at the Saudi government's experiments with social liberalization laid siege to the Grand Mosque of Mecca, the holiest site in Islam.

The attack came on the heels of the Iranian revolution across the Gulf, putting the House of Saud and its American backers in a precarious spot. Tehran had challenged Saudi Arabia's Islamic legitimacy from without, while jihadists were now doing the same from within. For a few days it seemed as though the world's most important oil producer – and the custodian of Islam's holiest places – might be in danger of collapse.

More Show less

Forty years ago today, dozens of bearded gunmen stormed the holiest site in Islam, the Grand Mosque at Mecca, in Saudi Arabia.

They held the complex for two weeks before a French-trained Saudi force rooted them out, but the fallout from the attack went on to shape the modern Middle East in ways that are still with us today: in the scourge of transnational jihadism and the deepening rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

More Show less

What changes now that the U.S. softened its position on Israeli settlements?

Well, I mean, not a lot. I mean, keep in mind that this is also the administration that moved the embassy to Jerusalem, from Tel Aviv. Everyone said that was going to be a massive problem. Ultimately, not many people cared. Same thing with recognition of Golan Heights for Israel. This is just one more give from the Americans to the Israelis in the context of a region that doesn't care as much as they used to about Israel - Palestine.

More Show less