An Alliance in Stroke
(B2) In London, President Emmanuel Macron reiterated his assessment of a 'brain dead' NATO. Which drew him a reprimand from President Donald Trump on the mode 'that's not nice'.
In fact, there is a real political problem in the Alliance, as mentioned (Read: Is NATO still a political organization?). And, except to stick your nose in the sand, the Turkish as American problem is recognized by everyone. If Emmanuel Macron's terminology is a bit provocative in form, it is justified in substance. No one really disputes that.
From a medical point of view, moreover, it would be more accurate to say that the Alliance is not dead. But that she had a stroke, a cerebrovascular accident, and part of her cerebral hemisphere remains paralyzed. This is a reality that nobody really disputes internally. While the Alliance's military tools are intact and irreplaceable — NATO remains a formidable machine for integrating sometimes very different military structures — and displays a certain solidity, the same is not true in political matters. What is the objective of the Alliance?
« Not all of its members are looking in the same direction. “Explains a senior officer. Gold, " for a military alliance to work, the military must understand the geopolitical alliance that is behind it all. [We need] a reflection to know what the threat is, concretely what the enemy is, how we should manage, for example, the end of the treaty on intermediate-range nuclear weapons (INF), should terrorism be part of of our missions? [...] It is important to have a common understanding of the threats [...] We cannot build a plan, a strategy without that. The time has come to ask the question. »
(Nicolas Gros-Verheyde)
Interview conducted with RFI and Arte today, and developed in written version