Trump has a reputation for making claims and comments that may seem bewildering out of any other politician’s mouth, yet are somehow unsurprising when he says them—many of his quotes being overly exaggerated and incredibly controversial, garnering massive media attention. Aptly referred to as “Trumpisms,” his absurd lack of filter when it comes to his responses has recently struck again as Trump continues to build momentum for his campaign.
On Saturday night (February 10th), during one of his campaign rallies in Conway, South Carolina, Trump related a conversation between himself and who he said was a significant NATO ally, in which he stated that if a NATO member didn’t meet the defense spending guidelines, then he’d let Russia “do anything” to them.
“One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’” Trump recounted.
“‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?... No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills,’” he responded.
Photo from NBC News
Donald Trump speaking at his campaign rally in Conway, South Carolina
And while most of Trump’s comments generally aren’t a direct reflection of his policy beliefs, this comment stoked a large amount of angry responses, especially at a time when many European nations were worried about their own national security during the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian conflict. Any perceived lack of commitment to NATO on the U.S. side could encourage more Russian overstepping of border boundaries. Many European leaders have criticized his statements:
“Any suggestion that allies will not defend each other undermines all of our security, including that of the US, and puts American and European soldiers at increased risk,” NATO Secretary General Jan Stoltenberg said in reaction to Trump’s comments.
Photo from Sean Gallup/Getty Images
Jens Stoltenberg, left, speaks with Donald Trump during a NATO summit in 2018
The White House has even denounced his statements as “unhinged”:
“Encouraging invasions of our closest allies by murderous regimes is appalling and unhinged – and it endangers American national security, global stability, and our economy at home,” said White House spokesperson Andrew Bates.
On the other hand, Florida Senator Marco Rubio on CNN’s “State of the Union” stated that others misunderstood Trump’s intentions. “That’s not how I view that statement,” he told host Jake Tapper. Rubio said Trump was simply using a story from his presidency to air his grievances about NATO. “He doesn’t talk like a traditional politician,” once again referring to Trump’s, well, Trumpisms.
Initially created after World War II as a response to the growing power of the Soviet Union, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization now has 31 member states. Article 5 of the treaty states that an attack on any of the member states will be considered an attack on them all—this article was invoked after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. As for defense spending, NATO members have agreed to spend 2% of their GDP as a target figure, but it is certainly not a required amount. And while some nations do fall short of the guideline, they’ve been upping their spending, “with European allies and Canada increasing spending for eight consecutive years” (Politico).
Trump has always been critical of NATO, claiming that it takes advantage of the U.S. military power and taxpayer money without giving anything in return, despite its involvement with U.S. military operations overseas post-9/11 and giving the U.S. ability to keep a close eye on other parts of the world (most notably Russia and China) through the military alliance. His denouncement of NATO and U.S. ties to the treaty can have profound effects on the current Russo-Ukrainian conflict and NATO’s attempts to keep Russia and China in check, especially if he is re-elected for a second term and withdraws from the organization, as Trump’s past national security adviser John Bolton says he might do.
Sources:
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/11/trump-nato-remarks-democrats-putin-00140848
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/12/europe/trump-nato-putin-europe-analysis-intl/index.html
https://cnn.com/2024/02/11/politics/rubio-trump-nato-haley-husband-national-guard-cnntv/index.html
Emily Ren
10 comments:
Once again, Trump's comments seem shockingly careless. It will be interesting to see whether his disrespect of NATO will actually have an effect on the perceived strength of the alliance (especially in Russia and Ukraine). This continued influence even while he is not in office highlights that a lot of presidential power is informal, like public/social power.
I agree with Taylor, that Trump's cavalier speech may have unintended (or maybe intended?) geopolitical consequences. I think this is an example of an unfortunate trend that is forming on the American right, where careless pandering is seen as "truthtelling." I think the fact that comments like these are so well-received on the American right is a reflection of the pent-up disappointment voters may have had in the past with what seems to be political corruption, which is ironic given that Trump has far more legal indictments related to corruption than any president in recent times. I think in the coming few decades, we'll either see the left also slowly shift toward populism as well (which they sort of already have, just not with the career politicians as of yet), or, hopefully, we'll see the GOP reject Trump, either after he passes away, or his political career ends.
Although it may be true that Trump's actual intention behind his words is not the literal meaning of what he said, I believe it is easily fair to say that as a former President and a current presidential candidate, he has a responsibility to be careful with what statements he chooses to make and what not to. As seen previously, Trump's powerful influence over far-right conservatives makes him a powerful political force, even while he's not even in a position of power. A statement he makes could easily lead to the stalling of the bill (for example the bipartisan compromise bill that was written about in a previous blog and was stopped because some Republicans suddenly no longer agreed with the terms they set). Thus, America cannot afford to have someone in power who is so careless with their words. Even if Trump's intentions did not align with what he said, it's time that Trump supporters stop apologizing for the consequences of what Trump says, and start acknowledging Trump's cavalier language as brash and harmful.
I think this really goes to show the hypocrisy in our society. Cancel culture has been such a prevalent trend recently, people have been cancelled for saying/doing things much less than what Trump says on a near daily basis. But look-- here he still is! So why is it that he can get away with things like disrespecting NATO, while others are simply getting cancelled for supporting him. Maybe its a subtle attempt to destroy the "fanbase" before the figure, but obviously with such a loyal following, the effects are minimal. Rubio is so right, Trump definitely doesn't talk like a "traditional politician", but how are we, as a society, letting him get away with it so easily??
Trump is honestly a joke. In my opinion, I think he needs to be a little bit more self-aware of what he says if he is trying to win his candidacy, as a former president who was impeached--TWICE. Trumps "unhinged" commentary could really throw him under the bus...I wonder if he can pick up any social cues. Furthermore, I agree with Chin-Yi, Trumps commentary isn't fairly acceptable, and I can't grasp the concept of how he has such a stable/ supportive asset of Americans who are willing to vote for this man.
Trump's comments are once again careless and crude. I wonder if his lack of support of NATO is because his opponents are supporters, or if he genuinely cares about the value of NATO. His comments are so careless, that one must wonder if they are orchestrated for the attention that outrage might get him. However, considering that this is an election year, this is probably meant to evoke outrage and no more.
I guess I agree that NATO allies should be paying their fair share (within reason of course) for the exchange of NATO benefits, but carelessly egging on a country like Russia to attack our allies is absurd.
I think that calling another president "delinquent" is so unprofessional and condescending-- that is a name reserved for careless youths and spoken by presumably, older and wiser folks; it is inappropriate for a president to speak to another president that way, especially over issues concerning safety and security. While this comment is consistent with Trump's policies as a policymaker, I think the more notable point is that he's clearly playing into celebrity politics-- we learned earlier this year about how the popularization of color TV created celebrity-like politicians, and I think Trump is a classic example: he has marketed himself as a down-to-earth, aggressive, and unfiltered man, which is far more relatable to most Americans than the average politician is.
Unfortunately, I am not surprised that Trump has made yet another "unhinged" comment. I agree with Andrew Bates that this comment could potentially be a threat to American national security, and the fact that others like Florida Senator Rubio still defend him and makeup excuses for Trump's actions truly shocks me. After these countless "unhinged" comments, how are people still defending his remarks and simply just downplaying them, calling it "Trumpism," and allowing him to get away with it?
Post a Comment