(ZeroHedge)—President Trump says that Russia and China “have zero fear of NATO” without the US being in the alliance, in a Wednesday Truth Social post, which comes not only as the White House says it intends to acquire Greenland – which has set up a diplomatic fight with European NATO allies – but also soon on the heels of the ultra controversial US military ouster of Venezuela’s Maduro.

Trump in the post expressed doubt that “NATO would be there for us if we really needed them” and simultaneously touted that “We will always be there for NATO, even if they won’t be there for us.”

ADVERTISEMENT

He focused his explanation on Ukraine, saying that “Without my involvement, Russia would have ALL OF UKRAINE right now” – in reference to the nearly four year long Russian-Ukraine war, which has a definite and deep NATO vs. Moscow proxy war element to it.

He continued: “Everyone is lucky that I rebuilt our military in my first term, and continue to do so.”

Trump’s main sentiment actually echoes the words of his top advisory official Stephen Miller, who the day prior was discussing that no one gave fellow NATO-member Denmark the ‘right’ to control Greenland.

Miller had expressed: “The US is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US. And so that’s a conversation that we’re going to have as a country. That’s a process we’re going to have as a community of nations.”

Despite the somewhat absurd diplomatic circus surrounding the lingering Greenland question, which has of course remained highly entertaining, both Trump and Miller actually have an indisputable point on America’s role in the Western military alliance.

If Washington were to ever pull out of NATO, the military alliance would simply become one only on paper – akin to a mere ‘EU Army’. Indeed Russia and China would not at all ‘fear’ NATO – and maybe they don’t fear it too much already (though there’s probably some significant fear and anxiety in dealing with a United States under highly unpredictable Donald Trump).

The quiet part in all this – and not often enough discussed – is that NATO has left a legacy of ashes and destruction in many places it has intervened over several decades – from Belgrade (in 1999) to the regime change war against Libya’s Gaddafi, and involvement in the Afghan forever war. For example, NATO still touts its ‘successful’ so-called ‘responsibility to protect’ mission in Libya, but now Libya is divided into at least three rival power centers, and there may yet be new civil war on the horizon. Another result was that ISIS popped up there, where it wasn’t before.