Timeline for Is an attack on the leader of a NATO country whilst outside NATO considered an attack on NATO, and thus a trigger to Article 5?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2022 at 6:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPolitics/status/1505423923500007426 | ||
| Mar 19, 2022 at 8:35 | history | reopened |
stevec wrod FluidCode Mithridates the Great 264 champagne bottles on ice |
||
| Mar 16, 2022 at 19:54 | history | left closed in review |
Dave Gremlin convert H Huang |
Original close reason(s) were not resolved | |
| Mar 16, 2022 at 10:37 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Mar 16, 2022 at 19:54 | |||||
| Mar 16, 2022 at 7:37 | history | left closed in review |
convert wrod Alexei |
Original close reason(s) were not resolved | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 21:08 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Mar 16, 2022 at 7:37 | |||||
| Mar 15, 2022 at 16:27 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | "The way I'd interpreted Biden's recent talks gives an impression that the situation is very black and white." Russia simply attacked Ukraine without Ukraine being any threat to Russia and NATO membership for Ukraine was far away if possible at all. Usually things in politics do not become more black and white than that I'd say. The only problem is that Russia and the rest of the world cannot agree on which side is actually white and which one black. | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 16:14 | history | closed |
Ekadh Singh eps Therac jeffronicus CGCampbell |
Duplicate of Would a (nuclear) strike that hits an NATO member state embassy/extraterritoriality in Ukraine be considered a (nuclear) strike against NATO? | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 16:03 | history | protected | Philipp♦ | ||
| Mar 15, 2022 at 16:01 | answer | added | wrod | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 14:53 | answer | added | o.m. | timeline score: 7 | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 14:16 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 15, 2022 at 16:17 | |||||
| Mar 15, 2022 at 14:16 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | There is no instance above NATO to even force NATO to abide by its own rules. It's an alliance built on trust. Take for example Estonia which is really close to Russia and really far away from the US. If Russia would invade Estonia (much, much more serious than your case here) it would certainly trigger article 5, but would NATO still defend small Estonia and risk total nuclear destruction for all? Nobody knows. Hopefully we will never have to answer that. | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 14:04 | comment | added | stevec | @Trilarion to be absolutely honest, that itself is extremely interesting. Given what's at stake, I would have expected the NATO treaty would make abundantly clear (especially to adversaries) precisely what would and what would not trigger Article 5. If there is some ambiguity, or some discretion, I think that's a valuable answer. The way I'd interpreted Biden's recent talks gives an impression that the situation is very black and white. But the ideas you convey suggest otherwise. | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 13:59 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | There is certainly no automatism. That's why "such action as it deems necessary" is included. The only answer to this question is that nobody knows what will happen in such a case. And that's the same answer that was given to all the other similar questions. | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 13:59 | comment | added | stevec | @EkadhSingh-ReinstateMonica I saw that one (and voted to reopen). But no, it's clearly different - that is about an attack on a NATO member's embassy outside of NATO, not on a NATO leader. | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 13:58 | comment | added | Ekadh Singh | Does this answer your question? Would a (nuclear) strike that hits an NATO member state embassy/extraterritoriality in Ukraine be considered a (nuclear) strike against NATO?. The accepted answer to this question answers your question as well, so I think that that your question is a duplicate. If you disagree, feel free to reply to this comment explaining why. | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 13:55 | comment | added | stevec | @Trilarion I feel like this is an eventuality that NATO members surely would have thought long and hard about when writing their Treaty, and therefore it's something that would have definitely been considered before, by NATO members. I'll be very surprised if there is no record of detailed discussion (by members) around what does and does not constitute an Article 5. | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 13:48 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | There have been so many article five of the NATO treaties questions recently and every time the answer was that it depends on the circumstances and cannot be predicted. I strongly suspect also here the answer will be exactly the same again. | |
| Mar 15, 2022 at 13:15 | history | edited | stevec | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Mar 15, 2022 at 13:01 | history | asked | stevec | CC BY-SA 4.0 |