Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) wrote in an op-ed for the National Interest that admitting Sweden and Finland into NATO would make America less safe by increasing its military commitments when the nation needs to realign its strategic posture towards China.
Hawley announced his intention to vote against admitting Sweden and Finland into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO); the Senate plans to vote on this later this week.
The Missouri populist contended that admitting Finland and Sweden into NATO would exacerbate two strategic issues for the United States: it would obligate the United States to protect more European countries in the event of an attack, and it would distract the country from realigning its military focus towards China.
Hawley wrote “when it comes to Chinese imperialism, the American people should know the truth: the United States is not ready to resist it. Expanding American security commitments in Europe now would only make that problem worse—and America, less safe.”
The Missouri senator also noted most NATO-member countries do not meet their pledges to spend two percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defense spending, which increases the risk that the United States would have to intervene to defend its NATO allies. Hawley explained:
As to Sweden and Finland, both nations are advanced economies, with capable militaries. But they haven’t yet made the policy commitments appropriate to their geostrategic positions. Sweden doesn’t spend 2 percent of its GDP on defense and won’t for years to come. And Finland, though it announced a one-time defense spending boost, hasn’t made clear whether it will sustain these levels. In the event of a future conflict in Europe, U.S. forces would almost certainly be called in to defend both countries.
And even absent armed conflict, NATO expansion would almost certainly mean more U.S. forces in Europe for the long haul, more military hardware devoted there, and more dollars spent—to the detriment of our security needs in Asia, to say nothing of needs at home.
Neoconservative Bill Kristol labeled Hawley’s op-ed “typically silly or disingenuous:”
David Frum, a columnist for the Atlantic, accused Hawley of “running fast away from danger” and said he was “ingratiating himself with pro-Putin voices at home:”
This is not the first time Hawley has struck against the foreign policy establishment by opposing entangling the United States in foreign conflicts.
Hawley and ten other Senate conservatives voted in May against granting Ukraine $40 billion.
He said in a subsequent op-ed for Compact Magazine America needs to refocus its efforts away from endless interventionism and towards nationalism:
That kind of robust nationalism is what America needs today. We can’t afford to be isolationists. That would mean letting other nations direct our trade, dictate our interests, and imperil the livelihoods of our people. But nor can we afford further adventures in globalism. Wilsonian foreign policy, left and right, has nearly bankrupted the country, while siphoning away our national sovereignty and decimating our industrial base. The time has come for a policy of national strength, at home and abroad. Republicans should lead the way.
Hawley said in his op-ed for the National Interest the United States must refocus its efforts on China to establish a more strategic foreign policy.
“Russia is still a threat, but the Chinese Communist Party is a far greater one. And a truly strategic American foreign policy—one that looks to this nation’s strategic interests now, rather than the world of years ago—must embrace this reality, and prepare for it,” Hawley concluded.
Sean Moran is a congressional reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @SeanMoran3.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.