32
Why won't they send in more NATO countries, after these months, to help Ukraine regain land from Russia? (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) by to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml
44 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It makes sense that they won't allow their own skin to be ravaged (United States, Britain, Germany, France etc), but why not the Baltics and Poland, at this point?

I'm surprised they haven't done so, after these long months

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 3 years ago (2 children)

De jure, it's because NATO is a defensive pact. In other words, they didn't help the United Kingdom during the Falklands/Malvinas conflict or France during the First Indochina War and the Algerian conflict.

De facto, it's because they fear that Russia could retaliate by using nuclear weapons or intercontinental missiles that could easily hit the US. What's more, these troops would be of little use and would actually turn European public opinion against the war. And they would be used as propaganda for Russia to inspire Ukrainians to desert their army to fight a foreign enemy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago*

    In other words, they didn’t help the United Kingdom during the Falklands/Malvinas

    Argentina attacked then and there's article 6, looks like it's explicitly written so that NATO countries didn't had obligations to participate into each other's colonial wars.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent