Originally Posted by
PDR1
Given Trump's previously expressed view that NATO should be disbanded I guess the answer would be "dangerously" PDR
There's been sentiment in certain parts of the US since the wall fell (1989) that NATO is Overcome By Events and we should "bring the boys home." What mitigates against that is that NATO decided, collectively, to not only begin to do "out of area operations" but to even expand. All of the nations had to sign up to that, including the US. Is that the better idea? I have mixed feelings about that. The bickering over people actually spending their 2% GDP, and American annoyance with freeloaders, has been going on since the mid 1970's. It's not a new wheeze and the alliance seems to have survived that internal grumping for decades.
Will President Trump, when he gets into office, choose the former posture or the latter? Before making a prediction, I will wait to see who he gets to be his Sec Def and his Sec State. I'll also want to see who wins the Speaker of the House (money is raised in the house) scrum about to happen. Ryan may not stay in his chair.
Why Trump may retract that rhetoric.
Trump's a real estate guy. Location, Location, Location.
Having access to real estate in various parts of Europe via NATO, or bilateral arrangements, is advantageous to the US. I think that such an argument to him may get him to reconsider that position, from "value of the location" but that also may not matter.
He may pursue the 'NATO is past its sell by date" PoV and see if he can pull out, which will take work with the Senate who is in charge of Treaties. If he does that successfully, NATO ceases to exist.
As noted in another thread, loose cannon. No telling what he'll do.