By Jeffrey A. Rendall
NATO didn’t walk in when America needed it most; let’s take George Washington’s advice
“A real friend is one who walks in when the rest of the world walks out.”
I’ve referred to the famous Walter Winchell saying a time or two before, usually in reference to a political dust-up between competitors in the Republican Party, or possibly linking it to some sort of breaking of communications/relations when the proverbial heat reaches its apex in the kitchen. You know, to synopsize a crisis point, events tell you whether someone stands with you… or they don’t.
George W. Bush said it after the 9/11/01 heinous terrorist strike on the World Trade Center and Pentagon – “Either you’re with us… or you’re against us.”
Unfortunately for American patriots, over the course of time, we’ve learned that there seems to be a lot more “friends” against us than with us. This has been particularly the case during Donald J. Trump’s presidency. Our allies’ head honchos haven’t forthrightly admitted it, but it looks like they’re put off by Trump’s candor and penchant for telling it like it is while dispensing with niceties and protocols the elites prefer to maintain friendships.
Trump set the tone for his America First foreign policy philosophy during his first inaugural address in 2017, a relatively brief (where Trump is concerned) oration that left Washington swamp establishmentarians scratching their heads and gossiping among themselves, “That was some weird s–t.” Trump had campaigned on changing the way Americans viewed long-term alliances, and he intended to follow through on his promises, too.
Change was coming. Now, however, the stodgy globalist powers-that-be haven’t ingrained the lesson.
In a typically strongly worded (and argued) opinion piece titled, “Americans Are Done With Feckless, Useless, and Weak Fake Allies”, the inimitable Kurt Schlichter wrote at Townhall recently:
“[W]e also need to appreciate the fact that NATO evolving is just one of the changes to the global order. Most of our old enemies are going to be gone. Venezuela, Cuba, and Iran are all going to be off the board. We will be free to face China with nearly the full weight of our power, especially once we inevitably tell the Europeans that Russia and Vladimir Putin – you know, the guy making war on Ukraine who our allies subsidize by buying oil from him – is their problem.
“We will inevitably be strengthening our new alliances with allies who provide a net benefit to America – the frontline NATO nations, Japan, the Philippines, the Gulf states, Israel (Hardest Hit: The podcast cretins), and maybe even India. The UK, France, Germany, Spain, and the increasingly ridiculous Canada are becoming irrelevant to us. This is the result of choices. By choosing Donald Trump, America has chosen to put America first, and by abandoning America, the formerly great powers have chosen to become mere afterthoughts.”
Yes, the less-than-helpful NATO members have effectively hamstrung themselves without even acknowledging it, and they’ve done so over what, … pride? Why else would the Euros deny their American colleagues in their nation’s quest to bring the awful and murderous Iranian Islamic Regime to its knees? Put it this way, would any of them speak out on the mullahs’ behalf?
“Friends” are only as good as their last actions. This thinking isn’t exactly new, either.
Preeminent Founding Father George Washington is remembered for issuing a futile warning for posterity to refrain from separating into factions/political parties, but the wiser-than-wise first president also urgently cautioned against future American leaders entering into entangling alliances with foreigners, particularly those overseas “friends” who would soon turn into rivals and de facto pseudo-enemies.
Washington’s presidency was plagued by former allies – translation, France – demanding America’s support in subsequent strife with Great Britain, still the most powerful nation on earth. The extra-territorial animosity built-up during the 1790s, severely limiting Washington’s ability to firmly establish the United States as a sovereign nation that neutrally and peacefully sought friendship and trade with its neighbors and world powers.
The first president understood that the United States lacked the means and strength to compete with the western European empires. Washington was grateful to France for its cooperation and help in the Revolutionary War, but he also knew it wouldn’t serve the new nation’s interests to further alienate Britain, either.
The situation with NATO is surprisingly similar given the United States is set to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence in a few months’ time.
Recently, the United States sought cooperation from its allies and was firmly rebuffed for no apparent reason. As has been widely reported, it’s not like President Trump begged NATO members to send troops to storm the gates of Tehran, so to speak. Trump wasn’t even asking for ships or other material support for the U.S. effort to put an end to the Iranian mullahs’ nuclear capability (which would most definitely benefit European nations as well).
No, Trump merely requested that the Euros allow the U.S. military to use unoccupied airspace to fly over their territory in order to refuel and provide more direct target access for NATO-allied American forces. The NATO members themselves wouldn’t be impacted, whatsoever, unless the skittish Europeans were troubled by additional carbon being expelled into their immediate atmosphere.
Maybe Greta Thunberg sets policy for the former “allies” who’ve adopted kook-fringe environmental restrictions.
Here’s thinking the European “powers” (I use this term lightly) were fretting over possible repercussions within their own borders by the waves of Muslim immigrants who’d invaded western Europe in recent decades. We’ve all heard the reports. The continent has been besieged by inward migration – and by populations with little regard for European culture or traditions.
And this certainly extends to greater NATO as well. The strange newcomers aren’t any more loyal to NATO than they are to the monarchial succession in the places still honoring kings and queens. Granted there aren’t that many such kingdoms any longer, but the point is that some Muslim immigrants wouldn’t look kindly on European leaders lending support to Trump and the Americans’ mission to eliminate threats from radical Islamic groups.
Don’t forget Israel’s connection to this, either. The “liberal” Europeans are closet (or not so closeted) anti-Semites who champion the bogus Palestinian cause in addition.
Similar to the now-worthless United Nations, NATO members rarely vote with the United States on significant resolutions that would ordinarily be considered perfunctory by adherents to western thinking.
Israel is, by far, the United States’ greatest friend, and the only nation that seems to “get it” in seeing radical Islamic ideology as the real enemy of freedom and liberty, not just static political disputes along geographic lines. Sharia law must be combatted with equal steadfastness as the Islamist groups themselves. They’re one and the same. President Trump understands this, but Trump also seems to believe we can “make a deal” with the Iranian rulers, too.
We can’t. There’s no such thing as a “ceasefire” with the jihad-seeking Islamic entities.
Would we have made a “deal” with Al Qaeda?
NATO doesn’t appear to harbor the same types of ideological departures as the Islams do, but the fact NATO’s brains aren’t willing to bend when it comes to helping Americans eradicate worldly threats doesn’t bode well for continuing the decades-old and outdated relationship between the nations. It doesn’t need restating, but NATO was vitally necessary in the years after World War II when the Soviet Union was an ongoing threat.
In the 21st century, however, radical Islam is more dangerous to the existence of the west than is Vladimir Putin and Russia. Russia’s economy is much smaller than western Europe’s “free” nations and counts only a fraction of their population. NATO nations can take care of themselves. And if they were truly worried about Vladimir Putin, wouldn’t they make their minimum GDP military budget contribution to the alliance itself?
President Trump came into office questioning the need to keep NATO going, and the uncertainty has only become more intense as time goes on. Put it this way – NATO isn’t making many friends among the political thinkers that matter in the U.S. these days. If NATO’s goal is to befriend the “Chucky” Schumers and Barack Obamas of the U.S., then they’re doing a smart thing.
But the Schumers and Obamas aren’t going to be the ones who’d respond favorably if Europe actually faced a real threat from the east.
And if the U.S. under Trump decides that dispensing with NATO would be in the United States’ best interest, who would sustain the alliance? Britain? Germany? France? Who?
“Real” friends support their friends. NATO walked out. Let the cards fall as they will.
Jeff Rendall is editor and publisher of GolfintheUSA.com and has written about golf and politics for over a quarter of a century. A non-practicing attorney from California, he moved to the east coast three decades ago to pursue and combine his interests in all things American history and culture. Jeff has worked as an intern on Capitol Hill and in various capacities in grassroots organizing and conservative organizations and publications, including a nearly two-decade stint at ConservativeHQ.com. Column republishing or other inquiries: Rendall@msn.com .