The world has criticized the likely Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s comment on Russia and NATO.
Speaking at a campaign event on Saturday, Trump said that if Russia were to attack a NATO country that has not fulfilled NATO’s financial obligations, he would not come to the rescue but would encourage Russia.
– It’s just irresponsible, that’s not the way to communicate between allies. For a normal candidate, this would be the end of the campaign, says the researcher Charly Salonius-Pasternak In an interview with .
“It’s common for Trump to make funny expressions, but they should be taken extremely seriously, because he clearly has an aspiration to act in accordance with them,” Salonius-Pasternak estimates.
According to Salonius-Pasternak, Trump does not want the United States to play a big role in Europe. He estimates that if Trump is elected president, he will quickly implement his goals.
– He sees that allies are so-called bloodsuckers and strong states are something that should be followed, Salonius-Pasternak says.
President-elect Alexander Stubb has commented on Trump’s speeches at his press conference on Monday cautiously.
– American election rhetoric is different. In my opinion, at this stage it is worth staying moderate and calm and investing in our NATO membership, Stubb said.
Salonius-Pasternak: NATO countries “should do much more”
Salonius-Pasternak points out that Trump frames NATO’s payment goal incorrectly. It is not about the member countries’ debt to NATO, but about the fact that they should spend the agreed minimum amount of money on their own defense.
NATO member countries’ defense allocations should be at least two percent of the country’s gross domestic product. Finland meets the goal, but many other member countries – especially those further away from Russia – do not reach this level.
Both Stubb and Salonius-Pasternak admit that Trump is right to demand more from Europe.
According to Stubb, NATO countries have an obligation to spend two percent of their gross national product on defense.
Even Russia’s full-scale attack on Ukraine has not awakened all European countries to significantly increase their defense budgets.
– I would have thought that the Great War in Europe would have somehow affected this, Salonius-Pasternak says.
According to him, NATO has significantly increased its deterrence, but much more should be done.
– From a researcher’s point of view, one wonders what must happen before all European political leaders seriously focus on the significant development of their own defense capability and the defense capability of NATO as a whole, says Salonius-Pasternak.
“Finland does not assume that the USA will solve everything”
According to Salonius-Pasternak, Finland and Estonia, for example, should not have a problem, even if Trump carries out his threats, because both countries spend enough money on their defense.
– We do not assume that the United States will come and solve everything. And of course we have acquired a lot of weapons and material from the United States, says Salonius-Pasternak.
Of course, it’s a small consolation if Trump wants to destroy the entire foundation of European defense.
– It’s a bit like rejoicing that your house doesn’t burn down, even though all the other houses in the village do, says Salonius-Pasternak.
According to him, in its security policy, Finland should invest in large organizations such as NATO and the EU, as well as the network of partnerships and allies – that is, to cooperate with as many entities as possible.
According to Salonius-Pasternak, there is a real risk that Trump would scrap the meaning of security guarantees or set conditions depending on how much a country has done for defense.
As president, Trump could not single-handedly remove the United States from NATO without the support of the Senate, but in any case, he could practically cause enormous difficulties for NATO.
Trump’s statement does not faze other Republicans
In the United States, Trump has not been directly criticized among his own people. Leading Republican politicians have reacted to Trump’s comment either positively or indifferently.
Senator interviewed by The New York Times Lindsey Graham pointed out that during Trump’s presidency “no one occupied anything”. According to Graham, Trump’s purpose was only to make NATO countries pay.
News channel In an interview with CNN senator Marco Rubio on the other hand, reminded that as president Trump did not withdraw the United States from NATO and did not remove the American forces in Europe.
Rubio said he is not the least bit concerned about Trump’s plans, as many previous US presidents have also called for Europe to invest more in its defense.