Republican opposition Kiiski may delay the acceptance of Finland’s NATO membership in the United States, but not prevent it – Rand Paul has been a brake on NATO before

Republican opposition Kiiski may delay the acceptance of Finlands NATO

The Kentucky senator wants NATO’s Article 5 not to automatically guarantee US aid to another member country, but to require a congressional decision.

13:15•Updated 13:18

US Republican Senator Rand Paul wants to change the senate’s foreign affairs committee’s treaty proposal to approve Finland’s and Sweden’s NATO membership before it is voted on. Tells about it Politico magazine (you will switch to another service).

Paul would like the bill to be brought to the Senate to state that NATO’s Aid Article, or Article Five, would not override the US Constitution.

In practice, this would mean that the United States would not automatically be obliged to provide military aid to another member country in accordance with the spirit of the article, but in each case the assistance would have to be given the blessing of Congress separately.

Paul tried to insert this into the contract text already in the committee hearing, but then it was overwhelmingly rejected.

Support for NATO applications is solid in the US

Finland’s and Sweden’s applications have almost unanimous support among both Republican and Democratic senators.

However, fast approval before the session break in August would require all hundred senators to support such a so-called fast track treatment. Therefore, the opposition of even one senator can mean that the discussion will be moved to the time after the session break, which is going to be short anyway due to the midterm elections in November.

Rand Paul’s actions are not specifically directed against Finland or Sweden, but are a criticism of the mutual relationship between the United States and NATO.

Paul is known in the Republican Party as a libertarian-oriented politician who is generally critical of the United States’ international commitments. Paul passes his father Ron Paul’s in the footsteps ideologically.

It is believed that Rand Paul’s proposal to modify the text of the agreement will most likely experience the same complete defeat in the Senate vote as it experienced in the committee stage.

What thoughts did the story evoke? You can discuss the topic on 28.7. until 11 p.m.

yl-01