How serious is the rift in NATO? — Inside Story

[0:01] Divisions widen within NATO. U.S. President Donald Trump is furious after a refusal by European member states to join the Iran war. Reports say he's considering measures against the U.K. and Spain. So how serious is the rift for the future of the military alliance? This is Inside Story. [0:19] Hello again, I'm James Bayes. NATO's not formally at war, but internal conflict within the military alliance is probably the most serious since its foundation 77 years ago. At the centre is U.S. President Donald Trump, furious at NATO's members' refusal to join the Iran war. Reuters is reporting that a Pentagon memo suggests he's planning to punish some members, particularly the U.K. and Spain. [1:00] All this comes just months after another major dispute over Trump's desire to annex Greenland territory belonging to NATO member Denmark. He's long complained about NATO members not paying their way at the expense of the U.S. European states are heavily involved in helping Ukraine fight Russia's invasion, the continent's biggest conflict since the Second World War. [1:22] So how serious is the division within NATO? And are there long term implications for the alliance and Europe? We'll discuss all of this with our panel of guests in a moment. But first, this report from Alexandra Byers. [1:36] U.S. President Donald Trump has spent a significant portion of his time in office making it clear he's not a fan of NATO. It's a grudge that seems to be getting worse. [1:47] He's been threatening to leave the decades-old military alliance since his first term. Trump has accused member states of being freeloaders, benefiting from the might of the U.S. military, but not contributing their share. [2:01] And in the last year, Trump's done more than anyone to test the alliance, even going so far as to threaten to take Greenland from Denmark, a NATO ally. [2:11] But then the U.S. launched its war on Iran with Israel. Trump called on his allies to help and was infuriated when most didn't answer his call. He said the U.S. never needed them anyways. [2:27] We spent trillions of dollars on NATO. And when we need them, which we never do, we didn't need them here either. To be honest, I was really asking because I wanted to see what they do. We didn't need them. We blasted the hell out of them, out of Iran. [2:45] And the last thing I needed was NATO stepping in our way because they're not, they're a paper tiger. [2:50] Now, reporting from the Reuters news agency this week shows the U.S. looked into punishing those NATO members who didn't support its war. [3:01] An internal Pentagon email outlines the idea of suspending Spain from the alliance. [3:07] The Spanish government refused to let the U.S. launch attacks on Iran from its soil. [3:12] NATO says there's no way to suspend or expel member states. And the Spanish prime minister has played down the threat. [3:18] The position of the Spanish government is clear. Full cooperation with its allies, but always within the framework of international law. [3:28] The email also targets the U.K., which has let the U.S. use some of its air bases, but has refused to help in the Strait of Hormuz. [3:37] The Pentagon brings up the option of reviewing U.S. support for the U.K.'s claim to the Falkland Islands in the South Atlantic. [3:44] The U.K. and Argentina briefly went to war over the islands in 1982, and Argentina wants to reopen those negotiations. [3:55] Those threats come just days before the U.K.'s King Charles is due in Washington for a lavish state visit. [4:02] As the alliance tries to weather the turbulence from Trump, it's also been working to strengthen itself internally. [4:08] On paper, defense spending by member states is up dramatically. [4:14] All met the target of 2 percent of GDP last year, compared to just 3 in 2014. [4:21] And all except Spain have pledged to reach 5 percent of GDP by 2035. [4:26] Trump can't leave NATO without congressional approval. [4:31] But for many, doubts about U.S. commitment have already weakened the alliance. [4:37] EU leaders are exploring a previously obscure mutual assistant clause already within the bloc. [4:43] And there's talk of strengthening a so-called European pillar of global defense. [4:50] Alexandra Byers, Al Jazeera, for Inside Story. [4:52] So, the future of the NATO alliance are subject for today's Inside Story. [5:02] And for our guests who are joining us in London, Khan Ross, a former British diplomat and founder of the non-profit advisory group Independent Diplomat. [5:11] In the U.S. state of Colorado, Eli Bremer, a retired major in the U.S. Air Force and a Republican strategist. [5:19] And also in London, Pablo Calderon-Martinez, head of politics and international relations at Northeastern University London, and a specialist in European affairs. [5:29] Thank you, all three of you, for joining us. [5:31] Let me start with you, Khan. [5:32] You are a former diplomat. [5:34] You also have followed international relations and the history of international relations. [5:39] In your view, is this NATO's worst ever crisis? [5:45] I think without question it is. [5:47] You have the most powerful country in NATO, on whom, militarily at least, the alliance completely depends, saying he doesn't like NATO, attacking his allies in NATO, even threatening to invade the territory of NATO allies. [6:05] It's not just the worst crisis in NATO's history. [6:08] It's absolutely extraordinary what's going on. [6:12] And I think the European allies, the Europeans themselves, need to draw the correct conclusions and disentangle themselves from their relationship with this presidency, with the U.S., which is anti-democratic, anti-human rights, led by a man who is an appalling misogynist, a racist, a danger to peace and security. [6:36] Sorry, Khan, just be clear. [6:38] You were saying the European nations should themselves, as a result of what you've just said, pull out of NATO? [6:45] I think the Europeans need to be thinking about how to defend themselves without the U.S. [6:51] I mean, what you call it, I don't know. [6:53] But the EU is one vehicle for it, of course. [6:57] But the Europeans themselves, particularly the most powerful countries, Britain, France, Germany and Italy, need to be talking now about how to set up structures of mutual self-defence. [7:12] Eli, let's talk about the latest storm, because there have been a number of Trump attacks, many Trump attacks on NATO. [7:19] The latest is an internal Pentagon email, and I stress this has been obtained by the Reuters News Agency, suggesting that Spain be suspended, reviews the U.S.'s position on things like the Falkland Islands, which is a U.S. territory not that far from Argentina, and removing difficult allies from key NATO posts. [7:45] I mean, this is pretty unprecedented, the sort of things that are in this internal memo, if it is correct, are there not? [7:55] Well, potentially it is, but one of the things that it's important to understand is that there are a lot of memos that go around the Pentagon. [8:02] So, simply because there's a memo there does not mean that this is established policy. [8:07] The Pentagon conducts incredible amounts of planning and contingency planning, [8:12] and so it's unclear whether this was a serious memo or whether this was simply written as one set of options. [8:20] With that being said, it does appear right now, given the leadership of President Trump and the cantankerous relationship that there is within NATO, [8:28] that this is the type of thing that could be on the table if the relationship between the United States and NATO continues to diminish. [8:35] So, I would take it seriously, but I would also caution that it is unclear whether or not this is an actual set of plans, [8:41] or whether this was simply drafted by someone as a potential option that was never really considered. [8:47] Pablo, let's talk about exactly what is being suggested in this memo. [8:54] Now, NATO is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. [8:58] This is the North Atlantic Treaty that the whole organization is based on. [9:04] This was signed 77 years ago. [9:07] Your understanding of this treaty, can Spain be kicked out of NATO? [9:14] Well, technically speaking, no. [9:16] There is no legal mechanism in the treaty to kick any of the members out. [9:21] I think there is a mechanism by which a specific member can withdraw itself from the organization, [9:26] but there is no provision, so certainly the conditions are not set out for a member to be kicked out. [9:33] And I would imagine if there were, if there was any such provision, [9:36] the bar would have to be a lot higher than what Spain is now doing. [9:40] And yes, of course, Spain has maybe fallen outside of some of the commitments to NATO, [9:46] but that's been the case for many, many countries for many, many years. [9:49] So I don't think there's any real legal mechanism or any reason why Spain would be kicked out of NATO [9:56] or how it would happen is very much unclear. [9:59] Having said that, there's always the option, of course, that the United States does lead the organization. [10:04] It is the moral leader of the organization to a great extent. [10:07] It was founded by the United States. [10:09] It's the main provider of military equipment and goods and security for NATO. [10:14] So it would be very hard to see how Spain would be considered a member of NATO, [10:20] why it would be in the interest of Spain to remain a member of NATO [10:22] if the U.S. made it absolutely clear that Spain was not welcome there. [10:26] But I think we're still far away from that scenario. [10:29] Khan, Spain has an air base and a naval station in the south of its country, [10:36] which has been used in the past by the United States, where they have resources there. [10:42] But this isn't the only, the fact that it's not been allowed to be used for the Iran war [10:47] isn't the only problem between Spain and the Trump administration. [10:52] And Prime Minister Sanchez has been very vocal in his condemnation, [10:56] not just of the war on Iran, but also of the Israeli bombardment of Gaza. [11:04] Yes, I think talking about memos circulating in the Pentagon [11:11] or the legality of kicking Spain out of NATO misses the point. [11:16] NATO is essentially a voluntary organization. [11:18] It may be based on a treaty, but if Trump chooses not to defend its members, [11:23] then he can, and that will have very dramatic consequences. [11:27] I think we need to be looking at the deeper issue of do we share the values of this presidency? [11:33] And it's abundantly clear that we do not. [11:37] Trump is anti-democratic. [11:39] He has tried to subvert democracy in his own country. [11:42] He challenged the 2020 presidential elections. [11:45] He whipped up a violent crowd to storm the Capitol, [11:49] let alone his relationships with authoritarians around the world. [11:54] Vice President Vance went to Hungary to campaign for Viktor Orban, [11:59] who was an authoritarian, who has dismantled democracy and freedom in Hungary. [12:05] What more evidence do we need that the values of Europe, [12:09] of commitment to democracy, heterogeneity, tolerance, human rights, [12:16] are not shared in Washington right now? [12:19] It's tragic. [12:20] I love America and the values it used to stand for, [12:23] but it does not stand for those values anymore. [12:25] Eli, you're the right person to answer that. [12:28] You are an ex-military man, but you're also a Republican, a Trump supporter. [12:36] Yeah, I think there's a lot of truth in what was just said, [12:38] but I think it potentially goes deeper than that. [12:41] There has been a rift that has been going on between Europe and America [12:44] really over the last probably three decades, [12:47] and it has been a divergence of values. [12:50] And as my colleague stated, [12:52] Europe has definitely got a different set of values than America does. [12:56] America is actually not a democracy. [12:58] It is a representative republic, and it follows the rule of law. [13:02] And what we've seen now is there are countries that are heading toward a [13:06] more of a pure democratic environment, which is very unstable historically. [13:12] And I think he's correct. [13:14] Europe's values are diverging from America. [13:17] America has valued secure borders [13:19] and a different type of freedom and intellectual freedom in the United States [13:24] that Europe is now leaving from. [13:26] If you look at the values of Europe today versus the values of America, [13:30] it is easy to see they're diverging. [13:32] And if you ponder why would the U.S. stay in this environment, [13:37] realistically, it's, I think, largely because [13:39] ethnically Americans have historically been [13:42] more out of Europe than out of other parts of the world. [13:44] But America has become much more ethnically diverse, [13:47] which also means that, logically, [13:49] America is going to start looking for allies that share its shared values, [13:55] and Europe and the United States no longer share all those same values. [13:58] So this is a split that I think is a few decades in the making. [14:02] And if Europe and the United States continue to diverge [14:05] on things like free speech [14:07] and on the importance of self-reliance and self-defense, [14:11] America believes that Europe should primarily defend itself. [14:14] Europe has taken the position that America should primarily defend it [14:17] and also prop up its economy. [14:19] It's hard to see how this shift does not lead to a complete divorce [14:22] between the United States and Europe. [14:25] Pablo, I mean, other NATO allies, [14:27] I think all the other NATO allies, [14:29] believe President Trump's war was ill-advised [14:32] and they were not consulted on the war before it took place. [14:36] The fact that Spain's been singled out, [14:38] there are other countries, [14:39] countries, Italy, France, big countries [14:41] who haven't done anything to help the US war effort. [14:45] Is it because Prime Minister Sanchez is the most outspoken? [14:51] Yes, and I think we have to understand as well [14:53] that politics plays a part, right? [14:55] It's a political calculation [14:56] from Pedro Sanchez and the government of Spain. [14:59] Pedro Sanchez has emerged as a leader, shall we say, [15:02] or has portrayed himself as a leader [15:04] amongst more progressives or left-wing leaders [15:06] across Europe and federal field. [15:08] Just last week, there was a meeting of left-wing progressive leaders [15:12] from Latin America in Spain [15:14] that was attended by the presidents of Brazil, [15:16] Mexico, Colombia, amongst others. [15:18] So there is a political calculation there. [15:20] And Pedro Sanchez, to a great extent, [15:21] is fairly comfortable playing pantomime villain [15:24] to Donald Trump because it helps with his image [15:27] and it supports his image [15:28] of being sort of the shining light of progressive politics [15:32] and left-wing politics and democratic politics, honestly, [15:34] in Europe and further afield. [15:37] And Donald Trump is not particularly popular in Spain [15:40] and he's not particularly popular [15:41] in any other European country, I would venture to say. [15:43] So it's a political calculation from Pedro Sanchez. [15:47] I think what Pedro Sanchez is calculating here [15:50] is that Donald Trump is not going to be in power forever, [15:52] one would hope, right? [15:53] And then when things change in the United States, [15:56] the relationship can become a little bit more normalized [15:59] as it was before, [16:01] I really don't think it's inevitable [16:03] that we're seeing a divergence of values [16:05] between Europe and the United States. [16:08] I mean, there are going to be always differences [16:10] between the political systems [16:11] that we have in Spain or Europe and the US. [16:15] But at the end of the day, [16:16] making a distinction between democratic politics [16:18] or representative republican politics [16:20] is splitting heads here. [16:21] There's democratic regions, democratic countries [16:24] that share more and have more in common [16:27] than any other group of countries [16:29] outside of the West or the NATO alliance. [16:33] So I really don't think this is necessarily [16:36] a rupture in values per se, [16:38] but I think politics plays a very big part. [16:40] And I think both parties are playing a dangerous game, [16:43] a political game that may lead [16:45] and might have longstanding dangerous consequences. [16:48] Khan, Spain's been in the firing line for some time, [16:51] in part because funding, [16:52] and we'll come to the funding of NATO [16:54] later in the discussion. [16:55] But the other country in the firing line [16:57] is where you are, it is the UK. [16:59] The UK always used to be seen [17:01] as the country that followed the US [17:04] in many of its military plans. [17:08] For example, and you were involved in this, [17:11] the war in Iraq in 2003 [17:14] when you were a senior diplomat [17:15] at the UN Security Council. [17:17] Why has Trump got this thing [17:20] against the UK right now? [17:22] Prime Minister Starmer described [17:24] as no Winston Churchill. [17:25] Now it's the Falkland Islands. [17:28] Remember that the UK went after Argentina [17:32] when it invaded the Falkland Islands in 1982. [17:34] Why is this all coming up now? [17:36] And I note that the king, [17:39] King Charles, [17:39] is about to land in the US [17:42] in the coming days. [17:45] Yeah, what a fun visit that's going to be. [17:48] I mean, I can't wait [17:49] as a fan of the royal family [17:51] and President Trump [17:52] or rather not of either. [17:54] But why Trump is picking on the UK now, [17:57] I don't know. [17:58] I mean, the UK's relationship [18:00] with the US is rather unusual. [18:03] I hesitate to use the word special. [18:05] But the sharing of intelligence, [18:07] for instance, [18:08] is I don't think it's equal [18:10] by any partnership [18:11] between the US and any other country. [18:13] Maybe Israel perhaps, [18:15] but there's a deep, deep bond of trust, [18:18] particularly in the security realm. [18:21] And for Trump to jeopardise that, [18:24] to attack his closest ally in that regard, [18:27] is truly breathtaking. [18:29] And I think we need to see this [18:30] for what it is. [18:31] This isn't just a kind of little ripple [18:35] in the sea of cooperation. [18:37] It's something far, far greater [18:40] that we have to respond to. [18:42] And I think this discourse about legality, [18:45] who contributes what to NATO, [18:47] is really missing the point. [18:49] Trump is an anti-democrat. [18:51] There is a fundamental ideological difference [18:54] between the Trump people, [18:56] the MAGA movement, [18:57] and the values of Europeans. [18:59] It goes far beyond what kind of democracy, [19:02] the structures of democracy that we have. [19:05] There, I think the speaker from the US, [19:09] our colleague from there, [19:10] said it right. [19:11] There has been a divergence of values [19:13] for some time. [19:14] I've lived for many, many years in America. [19:16] I'm married to an American, [19:18] and I've seen it for myself. [19:20] Eli, I mean, it is interesting [19:22] that this memo references [19:24] the Falkland Islands, [19:26] and the US maybe not supporting [19:27] the UK's sovereignty [19:28] of the Falkland Islands, [19:30] because the UK went to war [19:32] over the Falkland Islands [19:33] back in 1982, [19:34] and it didn't invoke Article 5 [19:38] of the North Atlantic Treaty. [19:40] It didn't ask the NATO allies [19:42] to come and help, [19:43] because it was outside [19:45] NATO's geographical remit, [19:47] just like President Trump's war on Iran. [19:54] Well, geographically speaking, [19:55] you're correct, [19:56] but from a functional point of view, [19:58] you're incorrect. [19:59] Argentina, [20:00] who was the opposing side [20:01] of that conflict, [20:02] posed no threat directly, [20:04] indirectly, or in any way, [20:06] shape, or form [20:06] with any member of a NATO country. [20:08] Yes, and the UK, [20:09] and Eli, [20:10] the UK didn't ask [20:11] for any help at all. [20:12] There is no precedent [20:13] for the US asking [20:17] for NATO to help [20:18] in a conflict like this, [20:20] is there? [20:22] Well, the fundamental difference [20:23] is that Iran has ballistic missiles [20:26] that are capable [20:26] of reaching the capitals of Europe, [20:28] and they've got nuclear materials, [20:29] even if they can't make [20:30] a full-on nuclear bomb, [20:32] they can deploy dirty bombs. [20:33] So, Iran had stated [20:36] that it had malicious intent [20:37] toward the United States [20:38] and its allies. [20:39] It has acted on that for decades. [20:41] So, I think there's [20:42] a fundamental difference. [20:43] It's not just about geography. [20:44] It's about the threat [20:45] to the region, [20:47] or the threat to the alliance. [20:48] And Argentina had no threat [20:50] to the alliance. [20:51] So, that was a dispute [20:52] between the UK and Argentina. [20:55] Iran is a great threat to Europe. [20:57] Now, Europe doesn't seem to care. [20:59] And again, [20:59] this is where the cultural divergence [21:01] is coming out. [21:02] Europe created an alliance [21:04] with Russia to acquire energy. [21:06] They have been working [21:07] with China on technologies [21:09] that could subordinate them [21:11] to China, [21:11] and they don't seem to care [21:14] that Iran is developing [21:15] nuclear weapons [21:16] that could reach them. [21:17] So, from the United States [21:18] point of view, [21:19] what President Trump is saying [21:20] is that, hey, Europe, [21:21] if you don't care [21:22] about your own security, [21:24] if you're not willing [21:24] to secure yourself first, [21:26] why should America [21:27] spend its treasure [21:28] and its blood [21:29] to help your security? [21:30] And that is the main question [21:32] that's going to be [21:32] going forward with NATO. [21:34] Well, the other main question [21:36] is about the funding of NATO. [21:38] Complaints about NATO allies [21:39] not paying their share [21:41] have been coming [21:42] from the occupant [21:42] of the White House [21:43] for literally years. [21:45] Let me read you this quote. [21:47] Free riders aggravate me. [21:50] But the interesting thing [21:51] is that comment, [21:52] which was reported [21:53] by the New York Times [21:54] back in March 2016, [21:56] was in fact [21:57] from the president [21:58] at the time, [21:59] Barack Obama, [22:00] not Trump. [22:01] Pablo, [22:02] Trump has a point here, [22:03] doesn't he? [22:03] Presidents have been [22:04] complaining about this [22:05] literally for decades. [22:09] Yeah, for sure [22:10] there is a point there [22:11] and it's a valid point [22:12] that some countries [22:13] have not been spending [22:14] what they're committed [22:15] to spend in defence [22:16] over the last few years. [22:18] That is very, very true. [22:20] But again, [22:21] I think countries [22:22] are within their right [22:23] to select [22:24] where they spend [22:25] their money [22:26] and if they're going [22:26] to be receiving [22:28] US criticism, [22:29] then so be it. [22:30] But we need to remember [22:31] as well [22:32] that the budget [22:33] of countries [22:33] is not infinite, right? [22:34] This requires [22:35] political decisions. [22:36] So whatever 1% of GDP [22:38] you're spending [22:39] on defence [22:39] is 1% of GDP [22:40] you're not spending [22:41] building hospitals [22:42] or social care [22:43] or schools [22:44] or whatever else [22:45] you need, right? [22:45] So countries [22:46] are not just going [22:46] to say like, [22:47] oh yeah, [22:47] let me just spend [22:48] another few billion euros [22:49] in military expenditure [22:51] if they don't really think [22:52] it's absolutely necessary. [22:54] And I think [22:54] that's the point [22:55] Pedro Sanchez [22:55] was making. [22:56] Pedro Sanchez [22:56] from Spain [22:57] was saying [22:57] we can still [22:59] fulfill our responsibilities [23:00] to NATO [23:00] without necessarily [23:02] having to spend [23:02] more money [23:03] or as much money [23:04] as you want me to [23:05] in defence spending. [23:07] And I think [23:07] that's also [23:08] a valid point, right? [23:09] And of course [23:09] in any partnership [23:10] and in any agreement [23:11] there's going to be [23:12] disagreements [23:13] and there's going [23:13] to be different [23:14] points of view. [23:15] This has been going [23:16] on for a long, long time [23:17] but at the end [23:17] of the day [23:18] the United States [23:19] was the main architect [23:21] of the NATO alliance [23:22] and the United States [23:23] remains the main actor [23:24] of the NATO alliance [23:25] so it really [23:26] is up to them [23:27] to maintain [23:28] the coherence [23:28] of the alliance [23:29] and I think [23:29] more than an issue [23:31] of expenditure [23:31] more than an issue [23:32] of what's being spent [23:33] or what's not being spent [23:34] I think the problem [23:35] for NATO [23:36] and the problem [23:36] within NATO [23:37] is that it's lacking [23:38] a clear sense [23:38] of direction [23:39] and a clear sense [23:41] of reason [23:42] of existence, right? [23:43] NATO was created [23:44] to fight communism [23:46] during the Cold War [23:47] there's no longer [23:47] communism [23:48] there's no longer [23:48] Cold War [23:49] and it's been struggling [23:50] for the last 30 years [23:51] to really find [23:52] a very reason [23:53] for its own existence [23:53] now that the defence [23:55] interests between the US [23:56] and Europe [23:56] are diverging [23:57] we see this crisis [23:59] within NATO [24:00] but I don't think [24:00] necessarily has anything [24:01] to do [24:01] or just solely [24:02] to do [24:02] with who's paying [24:03] what when [24:04] Khan, I mean [24:06] NATO members [24:07] have upped their spending [24:08] a great deal [24:09] up 20% [24:11] last year [24:12] in 2025 [24:14] the European [24:15] members [24:16] of NATO [24:17] but is there [24:18] a real possibility [24:19] do you think [24:19] that President Trump [24:20] could [24:20] when he goes [24:21] to the NATO summit [24:22] takes place [24:23] on the 7th of July [24:24] this year [24:25] in Ankara [24:26] in Turkey [24:27] he could pull out [24:28] and however much [24:30] they've increased [24:31] spending in the last year [24:32] they are not ready [24:33] to run their own defence [24:36] because they've relied [24:37] for 77 years [24:38] on the US [24:39] and it takes many years [24:41] to rebuild [24:42] your defence arrangements [24:43] well if he does [24:45] pull out [24:46] Lord knows [24:47] whether he will [24:48] or not [24:48] the people [24:49] rubbing their hands [24:50] will be [24:50] Vladimir Putin [24:51] and Xi [24:53] in China [24:54] authoritarians [24:55] aggressive lawbreakers [24:57] around the world [24:58] will be delighted [24:59] I have to take up [25:01] something [25:01] Eli Bremer said [25:02] which is an important point [25:04] he claimed [25:05] that Europeans [25:05] are happy to see [25:07] Iran develop [25:08] nuclear weapons [25:09] that's simply not true [25:10] Europeans [25:11] believe in a [25:12] diplomatic solution [25:13] there was [25:14] a diplomatic [25:14] agreement [25:15] forged by [25:17] an earlier [25:17] US administration [25:18] the Obama administration [25:20] that successfully [25:21] restrained [25:22] Iran's [25:23] nuclear programme [25:24] it did so [25:25] peacefully [25:26] without [25:27] military assault [25:28] without illegal [25:29] military assault [25:30] so there is a [25:31] difference right there [25:32] the US believes [25:33] in military attack [25:35] and military solutions [25:36] Europe believes [25:37] in legality [25:38] so there we see [25:39] the difference [25:40] as for your point [25:41] about whether [25:42] what the consequence [25:44] would be [25:44] if Trump withdrew [25:45] from NATO [25:47] Europeans [25:48] remember [25:48] do have [25:49] substantial [25:50] resources [25:50] they have [25:52] hundreds of [25:52] thousands of [25:53] troops [25:53] they may not [25:54] have some of [25:55] the sophisticated [25:56] capabilities [25:57] the Americans [25:59] have [25:59] but I think [26:00] Iran and Ukraine [26:01] are showing [26:02] that sophisticated [26:03] capabilities [26:04] alone [26:05] may win the battle [26:06] but they're not [26:07] winning the war [26:08] Eli [26:08] do you think [26:09] it's a realistic [26:10] possibility [26:11] that he could [26:12] try to pull out [26:12] I say try [26:13] because there is [26:14] legislation [26:15] and remarkably [26:16] that legislation [26:17] was co-sponsored [26:18] by Marco Rubio [26:19] who is now [26:20] his secretary of state [26:21] and national security [26:21] advisor [26:22] one of his most [26:23] loyal allies [26:24] but that says [26:25] that the president [26:26] can't pull out [26:27] but if he wanted [26:28] he could hollow out [26:29] NATO [26:30] could he not [26:30] I think that's [26:33] an accurate assessment [26:34] I think legally [26:34] pulling out [26:35] would be dubious [26:36] at best [26:36] but substantively [26:38] pulling out [26:38] would not be [26:39] and I'd like [26:40] to point out [26:41] that in all [26:41] the discussions [26:42] it seems like [26:43] there's an agreement [26:44] across all three [26:45] panelists here [26:45] that if NATO [26:47] if the US [26:47] were to pull out [26:48] of NATO [26:48] the loser in that [26:50] would be the [26:50] European countries [26:51] it is unclear [26:52] I think from [26:53] the United States [26:54] point of view [26:54] what benefit [26:55] it gets anymore [26:56] from NATO [26:57] and so that is [26:58] that is really [26:59] the subtext [27:00] under which [27:00] this is all [27:01] taking place [27:02] so I think [27:03] because of that [27:04] underlying logic [27:05] the current [27:06] president of the [27:07] United States [27:07] is looking at that [27:08] and saying [27:08] what damage [27:09] is done [27:10] to the United [27:10] States [27:11] if they pull [27:12] out of NATO [27:13] is the United [27:14] States any less [27:14] secure [27:15] do we have [27:15] a diminished [27:16] military power [27:17] do we have [27:17] a problem [27:18] with force [27:18] projection [27:19] around the [27:19] world [27:19] and right now [27:20] it's hard [27:21] to argue [27:22] that the United [27:22] States sees [27:23] a substantive [27:23] problem with that [27:24] however it's clear [27:25] to see that [27:26] there would be [27:26] a problem [27:27] on the European [27:27] side [27:28] Eli Bremer [27:29] Pablo Calderon [27:31] Martinez [27:31] and Khan Ross [27:32] thank you [27:33] for joining us [27:34] on Al Jazeera [27:35] for further analysis [27:36] on this story [27:37] or to find [27:38] the breadth [27:38] of other [27:38] material we cover [27:39] have a look [27:40] at our website [27:40] aljazeera.com [27:41] as ever [27:42] we'd like to hear [27:42] your views [27:43] post on our [27:44] Facebook page [27:45] that's facebook.com [27:46] forward slash [27:46] AJ Inside Story [27:47] on X [27:48] look for us [27:49] at AJ Inside Story [27:51] for now [27:51] that's it [27:52] from me [27:52] James Bayes [27:53] and the team here [27:53] don't go anywhere [27:54] Al Jazeera's [27:55] coverage continues [27:56] in just a moment [27:57] stay tuned [27:58] I'll see you next time