A follow-up on the previous post. Â We are essentially seeing the de facto disbanding of NATO through apathy. Â Can the US be expected to fight for Europe in a future war, if Europe doesn’t invest in the capacity to defend itself in any meaningful way?
I admit that this charade serves Sweden and Finland well. Does anyone doubt that NATO would intervene if Russia attacked either or both of these countries (and given Sweden’s and Finland’s defense relationship with each other, an attack on one essentially is an attack on both)? This cuts to the heart of NATO’s free-rider problem, except instead of dealing with Europe’s gradual defense cuts below the critical 2% of GDP threshold, we now see the moral hazard of an implicit guarantee of help without a reciprocal contribution to NATO’s security. Troubling, indeed.