Article content continued

And those agreements seem to hold no value to the Republican nominee. Throughout the selection process, Trump has often mused about tearing up trade agreements that he argues are hurting American manufacturers. He’s noted, fairly, that many of America’s allies spend less on their defence than they should, because they depend on America to protect them. But he has never been as explicit as he was this week, when he was interviewed by two New York Times reporters on the sidelines of the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio. Consider, for instance, this exchange:

David E. Sanger: Can the members of NATO, including the new members in the Baltics, count on the United States to come to their military aid if they were attacked by Russia?

Trump: Have they fulfilled their obligations to us? If they fulfill their obligations to us, the answer is yes.

Maggie Haberman: And if not?

Trump: Well, I’m not saying if not. I’m saying, right now there are many countries that have not fulfilled their obligations to us.

That’s … not how NATO works.

It’s true that too many NATO allies spend too little on defence (which is what I assume he means when he talks about their “obligations to us”). I’ve written often about the horrific underfunding of the Canadian Armed Forces, and many of our European allies aren’t taking their militaries much more seriously than we do ours. This is an issue that the United States has every right to be angry about.