"Game with Fire": Trump's threats against NATO and Russian Federation divided the Republican Party - The Hill
Some of the party members are aimed at protecting the world role and the obligations of the United States, while others are inclined to support a possible candidate from the Republican Party for President. About it writes the edition of The Hill. The source states that certain members of the Republican Party tried to reduce the value of Trump's statements, pointing to their lack of seriousness. "It's all sarcasm," said Senator Tommy Tuberville about Trump's statement.
"I in no way agree with the fact that we have to be distracted from our allies. This is, first, never done before, and it should not be done. It is obvious that everyone should fulfill their obligations but say We will allow you to kill if you do not do it - this is the wrong way, " - said Senator James Lankford recently, who parted in views with the former US President on the issue of bilateral border security agreement. Senator Johnny Ernst also supported this idea.
"We should not encourage anything like this. Obviously, Europeans are our partners. We will continue to encourage them to contribute to NATO and work better," he said. Despite the adoption of the law in December last year, which forbids the US President to leave NATO without the consent of Congress, the text does not mention other possible steps that may weaken the Alliance. "What we prevented with the formulation I think important is a formal way out of NATO.
But the president will have so many different levers that our participation can be significantly reduced. There are so many factors that influence our role in NATO , and they, as a rule, pass through the Ministry of Defense and the President of the United States that simply closure or incompleteness of ammunition warehouses, withdrawing troops from Europe - all this is possible, " - said the chairman of the Senate Committee from the Armed Forces Jack Reed.
Senator Marco Rubio, the author of the draft law on banning NATO by the President's decision without the consent of Congress, states that legislators should not impose restrictions on US obligations. "He told history, analogy, call it anything about how he came to this in the past. He never said," I will not protect the country in the future, " - nothing like that," Rubio said.
Michael O'Genlon, a foreign policy director of the Brukings Institute, claims that the response of Russian President Vladimir Putin plays an important role for Trump's statement. In his opinion, Trump's statement laid not only the support and hope of Putin about Ukraine and Europe as a whole, but also the danger of failure of restraint and possible escalation of the conflict, if Putin decides to check his hand in view of Trump's commitment.
"In other words, it does not matter what other Republicans think. It is important what Putin thinks and how he decides to act. Therefore, Trump's comments are a game with fire, regardless of whether the Republican Party considers it so much," said O 'Genlon. Donald Trump said the United States would not protect NATO countries in the event of an attack by Russia. He explained this with insufficient funding for the defense sphere.