Of course. But the principle remains that if your allies do not want to participate in your military action, they are not required to.
It’s the people in charge of that country that make the decision of how they want to respond to your Article Five invocation, based on their own values and priorities. That freedom of choice is fundamental to NATO.
Do you think it plausible that actual white supremacist Neo Nazis might call other people Nazis, despite being fully aware that they are not, simply to further muddle the issue? A sort of, “I know you are, but what am I?” defense, that most of us master somewhere in early childhood?
such action as it deems necessary
That’s a key phrase.
Pariah, possibly, but I don’t think a party like the AfD would particularly care about pariah status. I’ll also remind you that Article 5 has been triggered once, by George W Bush after 9/11. He then wanted to invade Iraq, and did not receive the full support of NATO members.
It’s just not that simple, unfortunately.
This is actually not true.
Article Five states that an attack on one becomes an attack on all. This wording is very specific, and they wrote it with this wording intentionally, to get people to be willing to agree to join.
It does not require counterattacks or declarations of war, merely that you consider an attack on a member an attack on you.
How do people respond to different sorts of attacks? How can they theoretically respond if they so choose? These are the kinds of games being played in Putin’s head.
I think they’re just reading the room. If he goes full-on authoritarian, do your shareholders benefit more from you getting in his way or licking his boots?
His first term there was a sense that he might shake things up, but they would eventually return to some semblance of balance of power. This second term, people still wonder deep down whether Trump might try to pull a S Korean style martial law declaration at some point, and perhaps meet greater success.
Anything that throws more sand into the gears of western allies is to the benefit of a rival. Make people more afraid, make anything more expensive, more inconvenient, etc etc, until we throw our own countries into chaos.
Kinda interesting to see an English language political comic with an English mistake that no native speaker would ever make.
edit: No? You guys don’t find it interesting that people are influencing the politics of cultures whose language they don’t even speak proficiently? That’s interesting too.
Her older stuff is good, but I’ve always been of the opinion she got progressively better and better as she got older. Birthday of the World, a short story compilation, is a masterpiece.
Her overall style is particularly well-suited to the short story format, as it allows her to hyper-focus on just a few themes, letting her stay almost uncomfortably tight. She’s already the kind of author that can leave you thinking for an hour with a single paragraph, and short stories almost let her condense a work into a higher percentage of just those paragraphs.
Old news, but still very cool.