Rep. Kinzinger rethinking Trump vote after NATO proposal 'It’s utterly disastrous,' the Illinois Republican says at a POLITICO event about Trump's threat to withhold support from NATO allies.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger on Thursday dressed down Donald Trump for his “utterly disastrous” proposal to aid NATO allies only if they’re paid their bills, saying Trump’s “narcissistic” foreign policy agenda has him rethinking his vote.

The Illinois Republican’s comments at a POLITICO panel event in Cleveland came in the wake of an interview Trump gave The New York Times in which the Manhattan billionaire said he would evaluate on a case-by-case basis whether or not the U.S. would aid a NATO ally under attack. The comments sent shock waves through military communities on both sides of the Atlantic and prompted a stern rebuke from European leaders, NATO itself and even fellow Republicans.


“It’s utterly disastrous. And you have allies right now, I mean I have friends that, you know, serve in parliament in places like Estonia, that every day worry about the Russians deciding that this is the time to reannex and take them back,” said Kinzinger, a former Air Force pilot. “And comments like this are not only ill-informed, they’re dangerous.”

Asked by POLITICO Editor Susan Glasser whether he would be voting for Trump in the fall, Kinzinger said, “I’m not there yet.”

“I mean, you know, look, it’s obviously tremendous pressure on me. I’m not a fan of Hillary Clinton, and I’m not going to vote for her,” he said. “I was closer to saying yes until last night, until this article, and this is something I have to work through on my own time.”

Kinzinger went so far as to say that, as a veteran, he is offended by some aspects of Trump’s foreign policy, in particular the suggestion that American forces serving abroad somehow constitute work being done on behalf of foreign nations. U.S. troops serve abroad because it serves American interests, Kinzinger said, as much as it does the interests of the nations in which they serve.

“I call it a narcissistic foreign policy from Donald Trump, and it’s the idea that, you know, the world needs us. If we’re going to be in Korea or we’re going to have troops in Germany, they need to pay us for this,” he said. “As a military soldier, a pilot, I’m offended by the idea that I’m some kind of a protection racket that has to be paid to protect our allies, or I’m some kind of a mercenary force.”

Senate Armed Services Committee member Tom Cotton, who appeared in the second half of the POLITICO event on foreign policy, was gentler on Trump but strong in his support for NATO. He said the U.S. must stand behind its commitments under NATO’s Article 5, which commits all member nations to support one another militarily in case of an attack, “not because we want to start a war with Russia, but precisely because we don’t.”

But Cotton, who has endorsed Trump despite their policy differences, said the choice this November remains a clear one for him between his party’s nominee and Hillary Clinton. The Arkansas senator characterized President Barack Obama’s foreign policy as disastrous and said it was Clinton who had been the architect of much of that policy.

He pointed specifically to the so-called red line Obama drew in Syria on the use of chemical weapons, a threshold Cotton said made America weaker when the president declined to act on it. He said America must “draw red lines carefully and enforce them ruthlessly,” and when the U.S. does otherwise, Cotton said the country’s credibility with both its allies and enemies is damaged.

“We shouldn’t just think about Donald Trump’s words. We have to think about Barack Obama’s actions as well and Hillary Clinton’s support for those actions,” Cotton said. “Barack Obama has unsettled our allies with his actions, setting aside whatever impact Donald Trump might have with his words.”