Analyst: NATO Article 5 isn’t fully clear

Watch Analyst: NATO Article 5 isn’t fully clear - AlArabiya English on Dailymotion

Transcript

00:00Is Rutter the President Donald Trump whisperer, as it appears, despite concerns the U.S. president

00:07wasn't committed to Article 5 on his way to the NATO summit? Now he appears to be in.

00:15What's the situation there?

00:17Well, very much, Mr. Rutter, you know, sent a basically dear leader, sort of, you know,

00:23you hearken back to President Trump's first term when he got this massive piece of paper

00:31and a huge envelope from Kim Jong-il in North Korea, and he said it was a love letter.

00:36You know, this is very, it's just consistent with people, dear leader, thank you, you're the greatest,

00:43you're the best. You know, so I'm not so sure it means an awful lot. But on Article 5,

00:51that's significant. And this is the reason why. Article 5 isn't what everyone seems to think it

00:58is. It doesn't mean that if one country is attacked, the others have to come to its defense.

01:05Article 5 was written in a way that it can be interpreted. And it was written in that way

01:10specifically because of the United States in the 1940s. They didn't want to have anything that

01:16required them to do anything. So if you read the text of Article 5, it says that

01:21if a member is attacked, a country will determine on its own, independently,

01:29not necessarily militarily, what kind of assistance it may or may not provide.