The allies seem to stop and cover while Trump threatens Canada and Greenland

Whenever we talk about NATO, this is usually in the context of money-or the condition of the famous treaty for each one, known as Article 5.

This ruling is the basis for the Western military alliance, allowing leaders from Latvia to London to Ottawa to sleep better at night, knowing that more than twenty other countries similar to thinking have their appearance.

What does not often receive attention is the previous paragraph: Article 4.

In today’s climate, Article 4 is unusually related to Canada and Denmark because they face the new American administration, which may be rational against the annexation.

European defense experts sometimes call it the “younger brother” from the alliance. This ruling commits NATO members “to consult together, in the opinion of any of them, regional integrity, political independence, or the security of any of the parties is threatened.”

Whether the stabilization of the annexation of US President Donald Trump meets that the bar is still seen, but the idea that Canada will make “country 51 well” has many ordinary Canadians who feel uncomfortable, but threatened.

Likewise, Trump’s designs on Greenland – which will be purchased or taken by force – are anxious as they are amazing for allies.

How serious, we must study his statements on those you talk to in this country.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spent the week in Paris and Brussels a meeting with European leaders just days after their arrest on a hot microphone He said he believes that Trump’s threats are real. Many in his government, including Defense Minister Bill Blair this week, It reduced the potential threat.

Without exception, there is a surreal quality for this debate, as if – like Is it not in the country of wonders? We fell through the glass appearance in an uncommon and upside down world.

An alternative to NATO?

If this was at any other time, and any other country, this type of conversation that we heard from Trump would have led to a talisman of allies and international anger.

The Canadians and Tofua fought in Europe in two global wars, in Korea and in Afghanistan.

Our nation was one of the most generous countries in terms of humanitarian aid, financing of development and even moral support.

However, there was no general condemnation of the Allied leaders and it seems – facing Trump – we find ourselves alone.

NATO Secretary -General Mark Retti recently was asked, before his closed discussion with Trudeau, about the capabilities of a trade war between the allies and the backward discourse coming from the White House.

“There are always issues between the allies,” Root answered alongside British Prime Minister Kiir Starmer. “Sometimes larger, sometimes smaller, but I am fully convinced that we will not object to our team design to keep our deterrence strong.”

To start an official dialogue between the allies, Denmark had to call Article 4-which was done only seven times since the establishment of NATO, the last of which is Eastern Europe allies after Russia’s full invasion of Ukraine.

There is no indicator either Ottawa or Copenhagen who think about such a call.

Svin Helgason, a former NATO official from Iceland, said that Trump’s speech – especially the idea that Greenland could take by force – should not be rejected.

“This is not the way to treat your allies,” said Helgason. CBC the home on saturday. “This is not useful at all, and in my opinion, it must be addressed, if not public, then internally.”

Heljason said that Canada and Denmark are fighting in Afghanistan under NATO after the terrorist attacks on September 11 on the United States and “lost many soldiers” and deserved respect.

“It is clear that the Allied’s strategy is” not to escalate “the conflict at this time.

“It is better not to end in some verbal fighting with Donald Trump, which is what he is looking for too,” the home.

He said that what Western leaders need to ask themselves at this moment is the type of future in which NATO is found if Trump benefits the threats.

Bohar said they also need to think creatively about alternative power structures.

“The European Union is not strong enough and not equipped enough, including institutions, to be a substitute for NATO,” he said.

Bohar said that any new alliance should include members of non -European Union such as the United Kingdom and Norway, and possibly Canada. He said that these countries can move forward in such a combined size now, to provide security “in the event of NATO failure because of the United States.”

Canada and the European Union are currently negotiating with a defensive and security agreement, but the liberal government has little less than its scope and intention.

Silence from the Commonwealth

In addition to calm and retaining the approach of NATO allies, there was silence that deaf the ears of the comedy, especially the United Kingdom, which is a country that we share deep historical, social and institutional relations.

King Charles III is the head of the State of Canada, and even did not publicly speak in defense of sovereignty.

“The king will not say anything that the Canadian government does not tell him to say things,” Andrew Percy, the former British conservative and former mall in the United Kingdom, told Canada.

“If the government wants to say something, it will do.”

He said that the argument itself can be extended to other allied countries, many of which are looking for their own trade relationship with the United States – or just an attempt to keep their heads down and stay away from Cross Trump.

None of them wants to be the next.

“There are things that we can do together, but other governments will take the initiative from Canada,” Percy said.

“Therefore, I do not necessarily think how other countries respond or do not respond. It’s: How can Canada want to respond to other countries at this moment?”

There is another factor in the divided response that there is no one – Canadian officials, nor the allies – are certain of the extent of Trump’s seriousness, or whether his administration has thought about Costs, costs and repercussions include this country or Greenland.

Rajby said that the swallowing of Canada would not make a mistake, will not be an easy task.

He said, “Canada’s appendix is ​​actually an armed invasion of the country,” he said.

“Now I said that he does not want to do that, but he tries to force the annexation through economic power. I do not think that this is the goal in the short-or-average (term). No matter how he must do to force the issue, and if it falls into his lap I think he will be very happy if we come tomorrow and she is all for you. “

Rajby said that the application of economic pressure to break the Canadian Union is a long -term possibility.

To keep the international scene of the rush to the defense of Canada, it may also be an amazing emotional component – a thing present when Rajby walked through various scenarios on how to absorb the United States in Canada: shock and dismay.

“It is difficult for me to believe that we are doing this conversation,” he said. the home. “It seems that someone will talk about the inclusion of this country by force – even over time through economic power. It seems more than surreal.”