A Note on NATO Article 5
There is no obligation to provide for mutual defense in the NATO treaty
A quick note on the NATO treaty — in particular Article 5. There is a lot of intentional confusion spreading on X about this question so it’s important to go directly to the text. Article 5 of the NATO treaty provides the basis for “collective defense” and is clear and unambiguous:
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
The key words are “such action as it deems necessary”. “It” in this case is “each of them” or “[t]he parties” to the treaty.
This means every state that signed the treaty will confer with itself and decide what action to take or not take. And to clarify even further — this section provides this option if there is “an armed attack against one or more of them" in Europe or North America.
If France and Britain want to send troops to Ukraine to get slaughtered the USA has absolutely no obligation to even confer amongst itself whether to invoke Article 5. This is because nowhere does the treaty specify any consideration for troops stationed in non-NATO territory. As specified in Article 6:
For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:
on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
Nowhere does it specify European troops sent to Ukraine are covered under the NATO treaty’s conception of collective security in any way whatsoever.
The more you know.
Well done bro.
Ukraine has been treated as such because NATO was looking to add them. There is no obligation for us to send them billions if we weren't in on it. The usual civilian progressive will not even consider it. Despite ideological and governmental differences,its no different then the bay of pigs. Russia pre-empted Ukraines NATO invitation.