NATO is outward facing. It can’t handle internal conflict.
We already tested this when Turkiye and Greece began militarizing in the Aegan Sea back in the 1970s. They’ve grown progressively more hostile for decades, with a number of barely averted military engagements.
The agreement would continue to have meaning with respect to external entities - African, Middle Eastern, Russian, and Chinese conflicts. But all the member states can do is roll over (or actively facilitate territory seizure) when they’re threatened by their largest member
NATO is outward facing. It can’t handle internal conflict.
We already tested this when Turkiye and Greece began militarizing in the Aegan Sea back in the 1970s. They’ve grown progressively more hostile for decades, with a number of barely averted military engagements.
The agreement would continue to have meaning with respect to external entities - African, Middle Eastern, Russian, and Chinese conflicts. But all the member states can do is roll over (or actively facilitate territory seizure) when they’re threatened by their largest member