NATO's artikel 5:

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”

Problemet med artikel 5 er egentlig, at den bare siger at landene skal "[take] such action as it deems necessary". Det er elastik i metermål, som betyder at et land i høj grad selv bestemmer hvordan det vil agere, hvis et andet land bliver angrebet. Det er sandt at artikel 5 betragtes som en musketéred, men i virkeligheden ville USA og Trump i tilfælde af et angreb på Baltikum kunne sende 20 bigmacs til Baltikum og et protestbrev til Putin, og stadig opfylde betingelserne i artikel 5.

Det giver os så mulighed for at bede dem pænt om at pakke sammen og tage hjem igen, hvis de ikke potentielt kommer et andet NATO-land til undsætning…

Det, tror jeg desværre, er op til fortolkning, og at amerikanerne kan slippe udenom. Formuleringen lyder ikke umiddelbar skudsikker rent juridisk.