The United States will insist that the NATO allies spend 5% of GDP on defense. This statement was made by the head of the US State Department Marco Rubio. According to him, no one expects that the alliance member countries will be able to achieve this in one or two years. However, he emphasized that “the movement towards this goal should be real.” Currently, only 23 out of 32 members of the alliance have reached or exceeded the current target of 2% of GDP. According to experts, the plank of 5% of GDP is unbearable for Europe. The main goal of the White House is to reduce the responsibility for the security of Europe. The head of the US State Department Marco Rubio said that Washington will achieve an increase in military expenses of the Western Bloc Martians to 5% of GDP. (from GDP. – RT). No one expects you to achieve this in one or two years. But the movement towards this goal should be real, ”Rubio said at a meeting of the heads of the Foreign Ministry of the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance. The head of the State Department also rejected the doubts of the adherence of Washington’s commitment to the allied principles of the North Atlantic Alliance. He emphasized that “the United States play an active role – as always.” At the same time, the United States expects the military unit will change. Also on the topic “The task of not from the lungs”: the Western media-about the desire of Europe to overcome military-industrial dependence on the United States, Western media revealed the details of Europe plans to strengthen their defense, including the intention of Europeans to find the replacement of the weapons of the United … As Rubio, the head of the White House Donald Trump “Not against NATO (as such.-RT), but against that version of NATO, which is not a version of NATO, which is not It has the potential necessary for fulfilling the obligations lying on all member states under the terms of the terms (North Atlantic.-RT) of the contract. ”On April 2, on the eve of the ministerial meeting in Brussels, NATO Gensel told reporters that NATO would remain unshakable, as well as commitment to this block,“ Americans have repeatedly declared their commitment, Article 5 (North Atlantic Treaty. – RT). I am absolutely convinced that this alliance will continue to exist, along with the United States, no plans to exit (Washington from Blok.-RT) or anything else. We know that the United States is completely committed to NATO, ”Rutte said. However, as the Secretary General of the Alliance noted, the United States’s Secretary General of this adherence is accompanied by“ a clear expectation of the fact that on this side of the Atlantic, as well as in Canada, expenses for defense will increase. According to Rutta, military allocations should “significantly” exceed 3% of GDP. The Western media reports the Western media, the ministerial meeting in Brussels takes place against the backdrop of different expectations of the participants participating. According to Reuters, European states seek to influence the negotiations of Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Ukraine. It is noted that against this background, the faith of Europeans in the US desire to remain the main defender of the continent has shook very much. In turn, Washington expects to see the willingness of the allies to spend much more on military needs than before. As of last year, only 23 out of 32 alliance members reached or exceeded the current target of 2% of GDP. For example, among “outsiders” such large countries as Italy and Spain. They spend only 1.5% and 1.3% on the army, respectively. As the American publication Politico writes, one of the key tasks of the heads of the Foreign Ministry of the NATO countries is to smooth out the discrepancies in views on the situation in Ukraine. The Europeans are of great alarm of Trump’s tense relations with Vladimir Zelensky, the US threats to stop Kyiv and withdraw troops from Europe. “Excessed demands” RT discussed Washington’s plans to force it to pay much more for his own defense, as well as the prospects for resolving disagreements between the United States and European countries. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and US President Donald Trump AP – what goals does the Trump administration achieve, increasing pressure on the allies on the issue of raising military expenses? How realistic for Europe is a bar of 5% of GDP, given that the United States themselves do not correspond to it? The chief researcher of the Institute of the USA and Canada Vladimir Batyuk: – Representatives of the White House and Trump himself are constantly saying that NATO countries spend too few, but they are not manufacturers, but consumers of security that the United States provide. This state of affairs is categorically not satisfied with the current administration – hence so hard, clearly high requirements. Trump’s logistics consists in the fact that Europe cannot parasitize more on the United States, and the United States itself should focus on solving problems outside Europe. Also on the topic “it was never discussed”: Trump excluded Ukraine’s entry into NATO in exchange for a resource transaction on the issue of Ukraine’s entry into NATO in exchange for the conclusion of a deal with Washington on minerals has never been discussed, said … For the overwhelming number of European countries, it will be very problematic to reach a bar of 5%. Many NATO members have hardly reached 2% of GDP and perceive such a level of military expenses as an unheard of victim. Approximately the White House at the same time introduced duties against almost all countries of the world, including Europe. Now goods from the European Union will be taxed with a 20 percent tariff. From my point of view, this event is not directly related to the requirement to allocate 5% of GDP for military expenses. However, both of these actions of the United States fit into the direction of policies to increase pressure on Europe. A researcher at the North American RAS Center for IMEMO RAS, military expert Ilya Kramnik: – The requirement to raise a waste of defense up to 5% is a bar unless for European countries. The Americans themselves understand this. Trump purposefully followed the path of maximum escalation. He seeks to create an atmosphere of shock and break through more realistic and, of course, more modest bonuses. Economically, Europe will not pull such a level of military expenses. I will argue this conclusion with a growing debt burden. In Europe, there are countries whose debt level is already much exceeding 100% of GDP. And those states who have more or less under control have a long-term economic decline. American soldiers on NATO military exercises AP © Mindaugas Kulbis political scientist Mikhail Sinelnikov-Orishak:-In his policy, the Trump team is guided by a refined accounting approach. It also applies to military unions. The current administration of the White House is the main thing that everything looks great in terms of numbers. True, in the future, such an approach can lead to negative consequences. Why is NATO so popular? Because it is convenient: to shift the costs of safety for someone else, they pay for your safety, and you increase the socialist and are popular with voters. This is the teeth rattle in Trump’s team, although it cannot be said that such a scheme is disadvantageous to the Americans. It allows Washington to establish its standards, its own rules of the game. Greed is extremely attractive, but think for yourself what is better: momentary accounting benefit or force others to act in their interests? Also on the topic of the Brussels hawks: why does the EU continue to inflate the myth of the “Russian threat” by the Foreign Ministry of Hungarian Peter Siyyarto believes that Russia does not threaten either European countries or the EU as a whole. From his point of view, the largest … – Earlier, Trump and the representatives of his team spoke very hard about NATO and even threatened to withdraw troops from Europe. At the same time, Rubio has now made quite encouraging statements. Was it a show, blackmail? How can this behavior be explained? Vladimir Batyuk: – What we observed was planned pressure on Europeans. Trump wants to force Europeans to produce more military equipment and increase the number of their armed forces. In Europe, there is a popular narrative about the “Russian threat”, according to Trump’s logic, they must do this themselves. The same in the ranks of the ruling elites of the United States and in those layers of the electorate on which Trump is based, many EuroSrkeptics who consider NATO an obsolete block, a rudiment of a long -ended Cold War. They are wondering: what are the USA, what is the mission of America in NATO? Therefore, the slogan about leaving the alliance in these circles is perceived extremely positively. In the event of this, such a policy exacerbates the contradictions within the alliance. Money can be considered not only in America. Europeans understand that Trump is conducting a PR action, scattering with loud phrases that the United States allegedly spend huge amounts of European safety. NATO headquarters Gettyimages.ru © Cineberg Ilya Kramnik:-I believe that Trump’s threats against the future of NATO are aimed that Europe is able to ensure the defense of the continent with the minimum involvement of American forces. At the same time, Trump still wants to maintain control over European safety and ensure high volume of supplies of American weapons to Europe. NATO as a military alliance really lost its former significance for Trump. In the new conditions, it is not so important, since the main opponent of the United States is China. Therefore, for the current head of the White House, the Allies in the Asia-Pacific region (Asia-Pacific region)-Japan, South Korea, Australia, and so on. Out of excessive pressure on Europe, can lead to the actual collapse of the NATO and the European Union, starting its own security policy. obligations that they must also fulfill. Rubio actually reminded of this. But the key goal of Washington is to increase its influence by reducing the responsibility to the allies at the same time. The tramP launched the entrance to its business methods to twist hands with counterparties. So far, the US president has not gone too far, which means that NATO will exist. In the end, as I think, Trump will begin to give the back. You will not go far on blackmail and pressure.
