Estonia considers itself a front-line state, a Nato member where its border guards stare across the Narva River at the Russian fortress of Ivangorod.

This tiny Baltic state, once a part of the Soviet Union, is convinced that once the fighting stops in Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin will turn his attention to the Baltics, looking to bring countries like Estonia back under Moscow’s control.

To help stave off that possibility, Estonia’s government has poured money and weapons into Ukraine’s war effort, donating more than 1% of its GDP to Kyiv.

  • nahuse@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Where does it say it’s voluntary?! And, again, you need to take it in line with literally every other treaty in effect, which emphasizes the ways that defense works.

    It can’t be automatic because US domestic laws prohibit the president from declaring war without congressional approval, not because taking part in a defensive pact is somehow optional. And, again, sovereignty is baked into all international laws, especially those having to do with the United States (it’s always been really serious about maintaining this more or less absolutely).

    You’re stating a “fact” that’s incorrect, and works in the interest of countries that would benefit a great deal from a lack of adherence to Article 5. Stop it. If any country decided to not participate when Article 5 is invoked, the alliance would end. It’s quite literally the cornerstone of the whole deal.

    Edit: I went ahead and found another source that explains what I have been saying: https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep10238

    What the action is, is indeed ambiguous, not the requirement to take action, which is not.