147

Venezuela - The Lesson for Canada (charlieangus.substack.com)

submitted 1 week ago by Sunshine@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca

58 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Tinidril@midwest.social -2 points 1 week ago

"may request others" doesn't make it sound very obligatory. The actual obligation as written is for each nation to take "such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force", leaving it up to each nation to decide for themselves what is necessary.

What exactly is Canada going to do to other NATO countries that don't respond sufficiently? There is no penalty clause.

[-] xthexder@l.sw0.com 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That's Article 51, not 5. If you read the very first thing from the link:

Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty states that an armed attack against one NATO member shall be considered an attack against all members, and triggers an obligation for each member to come to its assistance.

[-] Tinidril@midwest.social -3 points 1 week ago

And when they don't come to Canada's assistance? When they decide that necessary assistance is to condemn US aggression and send Canada a "get well" card?

Article 5 was written with Russia in mind. The penalty for noncompliance would be a natural consequence that Russia would feel free to pick NATO countries off one at a time. It's entirely ineffective against a US that literally could fight off the rest of NATO if it had to.

[-] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

Funny. You seemed to have completely ignored the part where it finishes with "mutual assistance obligation". Or maybe you just didn't read far enough.

Care to try again?

[-] Tinidril@midwest.social 1 points 1 week ago

Maybe you'll believe the Center for European Policy Analysis

The Article 5 wording is vague. It states that an attack against one member “shall be considered an attack against them all.” What is quoted less often is that each member state only has an obligation to take “such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force.”

In other words, Article 5 does not commit member states to deploy military assets if an ally is attacked. It only commits them to some form of response.

But, what do they know anyways?

[-] Tinidril@midwest.social 0 points 1 week ago

Did you miss where "mutual assistance" is completely undefined. I'll stick with my original answer. I'm sure NATO will come right to Canada's assistance with an angry condemnation of US aggression at the UN.

Laws with no penalty clauses aren't really laws, they are suggestions. Penalty clauses that can't be enforced would be worthless anyways. Article 5 is an aspersion, nothing more.