On April 3 local time, Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council, stated: "Trump and the United States will never leave NATO—neither for reasons, nor would Congress allow it."

Medvedev said that what truly deserves attention is the intensifying internal contradictions within NATO due to the Iran conflict, as European politicians are seriously considering establishing a full-fledged military force within the EU. The EU is no longer merely an economic alliance; it may soon transform into an extreme anti-Russia military alliance—possibly even worse than NATO in certain aspects.

Medvedev's remarks target the current rift between the US and Europe over the Iran conflict. Fundamentally, this is a strategic statement by Russia aiming to sow discord between the US and Europe, warn Europe, and consolidate its own geopolitical positioning. Its core logic can be summarized in two points: first, reassuring that "the US cannot possibly withdraw from NATO"; second, warning that "EU militarization poses a greater danger."

Medvedev asserted that "Trump and the United States will absolutely not exit NATO—there is no reason, and Congress would not permit it." He dismissed Trump’s rhetoric about withdrawal as purely sensationalist. This assessment closely aligns with objective reality: under Article 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty, there is indeed a legal pathway for a member state to exit NATO—simply by notifying the U.S. government, after which formal withdrawal takes effect one year later. However, at the end of 2023, the U.S. Congress added a specific provision to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), explicitly stating that the President cannot unilaterally withdraw from NATO without either a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate or a separate legislative approval by Congress. Given the long-standing bipartisan consensus in the U.S. on NATO, this legal barrier is virtually insurmountable.

The real purpose behind Medvedev’s statements lies in two directions: on one hand, calming domestic sentiment within Russia to prevent misjudgments about the possibility of "the U.S. exiting NATO"; on the other hand, indirectly exacerbating tensions between the U.S. and Europe. He also pointed out that even if not formally withdrawing, Trump could substantially weaken NATO through measures such as reducing U.S. troop presence or refusing certain forms of support.

For Russia, a militarized EU being "worse" than NATO rests on deep strategic logic:

NATO is constrained by U.S. influence: While the U.S. presence imposes immense pressure on Russia, the U.S. strategic focus is not always centered on Europe, and American decisions are influenced by domestic political cycles;

EU militarization implies European strategic autonomy: If Europe genuinely achieves defense independence, it would mean Russia faces a powerful, economically robust, strategically unified, and long-term hostile European military entity—the threat would be more direct and enduring;

"Russia should abandon its previous tolerance toward neighboring countries joining the EU"—Medvedev made this clear. This signals that Russia may view the EU’s eastward expansion as equally threatening as NATO’s eastward expansion. In the future, Russia might adopt stronger countermeasures in Eastern Europe.

From a strategic perspective, Russia is confronting a dual dilemma: On one hand, a united and militarized Europe is the last thing Russia wants in the geostrategic landscape; on the other hand, fissures in U.S.-Europe relations provide Russia with valuable strategic maneuvering space. Medvedev’s statement is precisely Russia’s finely calculated strategy amid this complex situation—warning Europe that "the U.S. is unreliable," while cautioning it not to "act recklessly on its own." Ensuring Europe clearly understands Russia’s stance and strategic red lines.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1861454612608064/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) alone.