Thread by @ThreshedThought

Article 5 is dead; long live article 5

A 🧵

We are in a new world now.

The new US administration is a revolutionary administration. It seeks to upend the current world order and usher in governments around Europe that are closer to its worldview.

This is not controversial - look at Musk’s interference in British politics and support for Reform. Look at JD Vance’s visit to the AFD last weekend, at the same time as refusing to meet the Chancellor (all during an election campaign).

Look at the repetition of Russian talking points, and the capitulation over Ukraine.

What became obvious at the Munch Security Conference last weekend was that European leaders now felt that Article 5 - the collective defence obligation in the NATO treaty - was in sufficient doubt that it could no longer be trusted.

The European security architecture of the last 80 years is over.

And yet, the response of the European leaders (European in the widest sense i.e. including the UK) has been utterly underwhelming…

… apart from the Danes who are jumping to 3% of GDP being spent on defence.

apnews.com/article/denmar… apnews.com/article/denmar…

Danish PM Mette F was deeply impressive at Munich, and she is clearly going to play a key leadership role going forwards in Europe.

Ditto President Stubb (Finland) and PM Tusk (Poland).

There are leaders in Europe that get that the world has changed.

And while this is going on - everyone is focussed on Ukraine - like bees buzzing around a honey pot.

I mean I get that Ukraine is the most immediate security challenge - it is the crocodile closest to the canoe, so to speak.

But the doubt over Article 5 is a problem that affects the whole of Europe, including Ukraine.

So whilst in principle I support a European force in Ukraine - including UK troops - there are some issues that need working through as I set out in this thread.

https://twitter.com/threshedthought/status/1891772177931808995

I would suggest that European leaders need to pull their heads out of the sand and recognise that Europe needs a new collective defence mechanism.

Let’s call it the Euro-Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

(For example the UK’s argument that it is going to act as a bridge between Europe and the US is for the birds - this US administration is actively seeking to undermine European security).

So who should be in the Euro-Atlantic Treaty Organisation?

The Nordics (inc Denmark), the Baltics, Poland and Ukraine - the front line states.
Germany, France and the UK - the big economies and two nuclear powers.
Canada - to help protect the Arctic
Turkey & Romania - to hold the Black Sea
Other sensible countries like the Netherlands.

EATO (the Euro-Atlantic Treaty Organisation) would have a mutual defence pact, including a UK/French nuclear umbrella.

But it should also go further than NATO.

As well as training and doing operations together, these countries should bring their procurement together. Wherever possible, they should only buy their military kit from each other.

The idea of buying American kit after the last week is a non-starter.

When you buy military kit you also buy a service package and spare parts for years - the US now can’t be trusted, and so buying military kit from them just creates vulnerabilities.

In any case, increased European defence expenditure spent only in European countries would boost European economies.

It’s a no brainer.

There are also some great ideas from the Lib Dems around creating a European-wide Defence Investment Bank that gives us all a way to jointly increase our defence expenditure.

So what else does EATO need to work?

Money & Leadership.

Very proud to hear @EdwardJDavey announce on The Today Programme that @LibDems Defence policy is to spend 2.5% of GDP on defence IMMEDIATELY, and for the government to convene cross-party talks on getting to 3%.

This speaks to the urgency that is required right now, and is well ahead of the other two main UK political parties.

@EdwardJDavey @LibDems Right now, leadership on European security is spending more. Only when you spend more, and have more capabilities can you lead in Europe.

@EdwardJDavey @LibDems Which brings me to my final point around EATO….

Who is going to lead it?

@EdwardJDavey @LibDems All military organisations need a leader. Which country is going to provide the leader for EATO?

@EdwardJDavey @LibDems My assumption would be that the only two countries that can lead it would be Britain and France …

… because of a combination of mindset/strategic culture, size of economies/militaries, and possession of nuclear weapons.

@EdwardJDavey @LibDems My travels around Europe over the last two weeks speaking to tens of European leaders, officials and generals tell me that Europe wants the UK to step up and lead.

“Where is the UK?” they are all asking.

@EdwardJDavey @LibDems At the moment, I don’t see the UK leading when it should. I don’t see it leading on defence spending, and I don’t see it leading in creating a new collective defence architecture in Europe.

@EdwardJDavey @LibDems Back to Ukraine.

If European countries could come together and create something like EATO, then it also solves the Ukraine security guarantee problem.

@EdwardJDavey @LibDems If, as seems likely, some Ukrainian territory in the East and Crimea continues to be occupied by Russia after a “peace agreement”, then Ukraine becomes like East/West Germany during the Cold War - divided but with the West firmly within EATO.

@EdwardJDavey @LibDems NATO is dead; long live EATO.

ENDS