Could Trump pull the United States out of NATO? – world order

It is not clear that Donald Trump could remove the United States from NATO, but he would have the mechanisms in place to dismantle it. The former president said on February 11 that, if he returned to the White House, he would encourage Russia to attack alliance members that do not spend enough on defense. Only eleven of the organization’s 31 countries met their commitment to devote 2% of GDP to defense in 2023. With 1.26%, Spain is the third place with the least investment. The Republican veteran has threatened to tear up NATO’s principle of mutual defense, and his former national security adviser, John Bolton, has suggested he would withdraw the United States from the alliance if he wins the presidential election.

Leaving NATO: the path into the unknown

The possibility of leaving NATO is regulated in Article 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty. This agreement establishes that any party can withdraw from the organization by giving notice twenty years after its entry into force, i.e. one year before 1969. However, there are questions about whether Trump could unilaterally withdraw from the United States. In December, the US Congress passed the annual 2024 defense bill, which included a provision that would prevent Trump from leaving NATO without approval of the legislation in Congress or the support of two-thirds of the Senate. Despite this, it is not clear that this rule complies with the Constitution. The constitutional text indicates that the Senate must give its consent to the conclusion of treaties, but it says nothing about withdrawing from them.

Since the 20th century, there has been a tradition of the President concluding treaties without opposition from the legislature. Trump adopted this behavior by withdrawing the United States from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with Russia in 2019. The only time Congress questioned the executive branch’s authority to terminate those agreements was in 1978, when Republican Senator Barry Goldwater sued Jimmy Carter for breaking the mutual defense treaty with Taiwan. The Supreme Court dismissed the suit, but began debating the constitutionality of the President’s actions. If Trump decided to leave NATO, it would trigger a similar conflict. The last word will once again be the Supreme Court, where today six of the nine justices are conservative. Trump named three of them.

Another option is for Trump to appeal to the 2% spending failure to justify his withdrawal from NATO. International law recognizes that a party may leave a treaty if the other party has committed a serious breach. In the same sense, in 2013 the US Supreme Court issued a ruling on the Charlton vs. Kelly case, in which it defended that the President can invalidate an agreement if there is a substantial violation of it. However, the defense spending commitment is not included in the North Atlantic Treaty, but is a political agreement established at the 2014 NATO summit.

Trump doesn’t need to leave NATO to destroy it.

However, Trump has plans to destroy NATO from within. First, to ignore the commitment to mutual defense enshrined in Article 5 of the treaty. This provision establishes that, if there is an armed attack on a NATO country, the remaining members must provide assistance. However, it also states that each party may take such measures as it deems necessary. In the United States, the President is the commander in chief of the armed forces. Therefore, Trump cannot help his European allies with troops in case of aggression. Similarly, it could withdraw its ambassador to NATO, bar its diplomats from attending meetings or reduce their contributions to the organization.

Despite not violating Article 5, Trump would violate the trust of our allies and the principle of collective security, which has been the cornerstone of European security since the end of World War II. Until now, fear of a direct military response from the United States had prevented other countries from attacking NATO territory. Without Washington’s security guarantees, Europe would be exposed to external attack. Even if it violates the treaty, it does not even consider sanctions. Furthermore, the United States is the hegemonic power of the alliance, so its participation is essential to the organization.