What driving forces and restraining forces are there to the Trump administration leaving NATO?
-
What driving forces and restraining forces are there to the Trump administration leaving NATO?
(Please no sarcasm and other common noise in the comments. Just your best guesses at the facts)
@malte could imagine them announcing it without much forethought, seeing it as a means of paying lip service to campaign promises about america first and no new wars and so on, and then getting bogged down for years in the question of what will happen to their air base in ramstein afterwards
-
@malte could imagine them announcing it without much forethought, seeing it as a means of paying lip service to campaign promises about america first and no new wars and so on, and then getting bogged down for years in the question of what will happen to their air base in ramstein afterwards
@henry That's sounds like a very likely scenario. So driving forces being withdrawing from global hegemony (America first) and restraining forces being that the US is so locked-in that there is so much (built environment) to withdraw from physically
-
M malte@radikal.social shared this topic
-
What driving forces and restraining forces are there to the Trump administration leaving NATO?
(Please no sarcasm and other common noise in the comments. Just your best guesses at the facts)
I can too. Driving forces: That the US has lost every war they've started since Vietnam. The last 50 years has been a slow decline of American hegemony and thus war is less effective for the US to assert itself. Parts of the state probably knows this and tries to influence the Trump administration (I partly see America first in this light).
-
What driving forces and restraining forces are there to the Trump administration leaving NATO?
(Please no sarcasm and other common noise in the comments. Just your best guesses at the facts)
@malte I would say Nato-membership is a bargaining chip bolstering US-hegemonic power in that it compels members to put up with some of the imperialist BS of the US.
-
@malte I would say Nato-membership is a bargaining chip bolstering US-hegemonic power in that it compels members to put up with some of the imperialist BS of the US.
@jonben So is that a driving or restraining force to leave NATO for the Trump administration? I see both options as possible, so I'm curious
-
@jonben So is that a driving or restraining force to leave NATO for the Trump administration? I see both options as possible, so I'm curious
@malte A restraining force keeping the US in Nato. I think it makes it easier for the US to exercise hegemonic power with and over Nato allies
-
@malte A restraining force keeping the US in Nato. I think it makes it easier for the US to exercise hegemonic power with and over Nato allies
@jonben The question that raises for me is whether the Trump administration is actually on a path where exercising global hegemony is their goal or not? At the very least, there's contradictory forces within the administration on that issue. Parts of the government seems to have decided years ago that continuing to weild that kind of force is coming with too big of price and perhaps too little gain compared to turning the focus back towards the American continent.
-
@jonben The question that raises for me is whether the Trump administration is actually on a path where exercising global hegemony is their goal or not? At the very least, there's contradictory forces within the administration on that issue. Parts of the government seems to have decided years ago that continuing to weild that kind of force is coming with too big of price and perhaps too little gain compared to turning the focus back towards the American continent.
@jonben Seen from that perspective, staying in the NATO potentially keeps you invested in a paradigm that goes against your goal.
-
@jonben Seen from that perspective, staying in the NATO potentially keeps you invested in a paradigm that goes against your goal.
@malte Really interesting points. I think it's fully possible that there are forces affecting the US foreign policy agenda without a systemic analysis of their actions. One example of this might be US America First style policies that disrupt key aspects of the US ability to project power. Leaving Nato might be one such policy. If the US leaves Nato, Nato members face the challenge of developing strategy independently, possibly disregarding US interests.
-
I can too. Driving forces: That the US has lost every war they've started since Vietnam. The last 50 years has been a slow decline of American hegemony and thus war is less effective for the US to assert itself. Parts of the state probably knows this and tries to influence the Trump administration (I partly see America first in this light).
@anderspuck proberly have an idea?
-
@anderspuck proberly have an idea?
@siggi It's a bit hard to see what the US gets out of leaving NATO. It will lead to losses in the U.S. weapons industry, and they will lose access to overseas bases. So I guess the obstacle is common sense, which obviously does not necessarily restrain Trump.
-
What driving forces and restraining forces are there to the Trump administration leaving NATO?
(Please no sarcasm and other common noise in the comments. Just your best guesses at the facts)
@malte as far as I understand he needs a 2/3 majority in the house (or was it the senate?) to approve leaving + then the other chamber has to ratify that.
I realize he has done a lot of things without asking congress & some of it is being investigated wrt legality. However, I believe all the democrats and quite a lot of the republicans are still sane enough to not want to leave NATO. I think this will be much harder for him to do, than the other shit he's pulled (or he would have left already)
