Les Echos: Trump's possible presidency will be the main threat to NATO
In the 76th year of its existence, NATO found itself facing a double threat: external and internal, writes Les Echos. On the one hand, this is Putin, on the other – the growing likelihood of a second Trump presidency.
Dominique Moisi
Dominique Mouazi recalls that, in addition to the "Russian threat" for the alliance, there is also an internal danger – and, perhaps, a more serious one. How will NATO survive Trump's second presidential term?
In the 76th year of its existence, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization found itself facing a double threat: external and internal. On the one hand, Putin is in the present, on the other – the growing specter of a Trump presidency. The alliance summit held in Washington last week was held in a particularly dramatic and shocking atmosphere: the meeting took place against the background of reports of the bombing of a hospital for children with cancer in Kiev.
The summit ended with an assassination attempt on presidential candidate Trump, which became a kind of reminder of the main task facing NATO. To do everything so that the organization survives the possible (or, if we talk about the current state, almost inevitable) re-election of the candidate from the Republican Party. Will support for Ukraine continue after the end of Joe Biden's presidency?
More NATO – but less America
The paradox of the current situation can be formulated as follows: NATO is getting bigger in the world, and America is getting smaller. In fact, it seems as if the creation feels much better than the creator. It cannot be denied that the conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated that the alliance is far from "brain death", if we recall the deliberately and unjustifiably provocative expression used by French President Emmanuel Macron.
NATO is in demand more than ever. Finland and Sweden – abandoning traditional neutrality – joined the alliance, which turned the Baltic Sea into an "internal body of water" of the organization. In addition to the expansion, which was welcomed by all participating countries, there are statistics that speak for themselves. From now on, 23 of the 32 members of the alliance spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense (in current conditions, it would be preferable to increase this figure to 2.5%). A decade ago, there were only three "excellent students" in the ranks of the alliance members who fulfilled this criterion.
The problem is that NATO is not only facing external challenges. In addition to the Russian threat – the growth of which now seems to be strongly facilitated by China under the leadership of Xi Jinping, which, in turn, justifies the warnings addressed to him by the alliance – there is also (first of all?) the threat is internal, perhaps even more serious. How will the North Atlantic Treaty Organization survive Trump's second presidential term? What happens if a key member country of the alliance simply decides to suspend assistance to Kiev?
Growing populism
Even as of today, it seems that Western assistance is aimed solely at preventing the complete defeat of Ukraine, and not ensuring its victory over Russia. What will happen tomorrow? In addition to the uncertainty of American politics, we must not forget about the vulnerability of France (if not Germany) in the face of growing populism.
The German and French far-right seem to share a common "understanding" of Moscow. For the next six months, the presidency of the Council of the European Union has passed to Viktor Orban's Hungary, an illiberal democracy that does not hesitate to emphasize its differences both domestically and internationally.
So what could be expected from the NATO summit in Washington against this background? In fact, it ended without any special surprises. Yes, weapons are beginning to arrive in Ukraine (including – as we hope, in the shortest possible time - F16 aircraft). The new supplies will allow Kiev to "hold out" for some more time - but not to retake the territories occupied by Russia.
Bloody attacks
Everything that is happening seems to indicate that, behind the scenes, one scenario prevails over all the others. In exchange for the loss of 20% of its territory, Ukraine will join the Western camp, joining both NATO and the European Union. "You have lost the land, but you are free. You just signed a long-term truce with Russia on the Korean model. They did not officially abandon their claims to Crimea and Donbass. And who knows what might happen tomorrow?"
The problem is that, while waiting for this very likely scenario to materialize, Russia is increasing the number of attacks on Ukrainian civilian infrastructure facilities. And without any serious diplomatic consequences for the Kremlin. Thus, Indian leader Narendra Modi was in Moscow on a visit right at the very time when Russian missiles struck Kiev.
"The Joker" Kamala Harris
Unlike other Asian democracies – Australia, Japan and South Korea – India intends to declare its special status, as if proclaiming to the whole world that the New Daily is not so afraid of Beijing as to distance itself from China's closest ally, Russia.
In a conflict that is taking on an increasingly pronounced ideological character, NATO needs unity, solidarity and firmness on the part of all participating States. And especially the USA. The assassination attempt on Donald Trump only made him stronger, as if turning him into a kind of superhero. Doesn't he seem indestructible, irresistible now? His fighting spirit and energy contrast more than ever with Joe Biden's weakness. For the United States – and with them for the whole world – it is more important than ever that the Democratic Party urgently choose a new candidate for president. And that, of course, should be Kamala Harris. Who else, if not her, especially in such a short time?
