Awesome. Canada next.

  • e$tGyr#J2pqM8v@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    through precedent we know that A5 invocations can (and almost certainly will) trigger military aid.

    I don’t see why this is ‘almost certain’. You rightfully point out that the EU clause leaves wiggle room, but I don’t see why you think that room is not there with NATO. I don’t know if the current US president cares much about any precedents. If he can wiggle he will wiggle. I don’t think Europe trusts US to honor A5 any more.

    • 𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      There is of course wiggle room in the NATO clause, but there’s less of it. Additionally, the fact that the collective decides if military action is needed then individual members don’t get an opt-out of that.

      Of course, ultimately nothing is ironclad, but given the established precedent for A5 and the excessive amount of individual wiggle room in A42, as far as I know A5 is considered to be more likely to be successfully invoked than A42 is.