Archived copy is here: https://archive.is/DqZ6m

The article says this:

“Immediately withdraw from NATO’s integrated command and then, in stages, from the organization itself. Reject the tribute demanded by the United States of 5% of GDP devoted to defense spending,” read France Unbowed’s 222-page program.

However, France under Mélenchon would still provide assistance to European Union countries under EU treaties, the document added

Is Melenchon right? Is it better for the EU to be the organisation of mutual defence guarantees for Europe, rather than NATO?

  • Zos_Kia
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    I’m surprised to see so much Atlantist sentiment on Lemmy.

    The US has proved not only that their security umbrella means nothing, but that it in fact invites foreign aggression. And once you’re attacked they’ll probably shit on you and go back on all their commitments. What’s the point exactly?

    • Jiral@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      60 minutes ago

      Most of the NATO members are not the US, also in terms of population. If you propose leaving NATO without a realistic alternative of a kind of NATO without the US for example all you are doing is selling out Europe.

      • kossa@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 minutes ago

        Um, but the “kind of NATO” is called EU already. The mutual defense wording in the EU treaties is by far stronger than the wording in the NATO contract. I mean, in the end it’s all words on paper anyway, but there’s that.