I don't think this is true. Turkey has been playing both sides for a long time, and this is just another step in that direction. But NATO is still resilient unfortunately.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Turkey absolutely likes to play both sides, but I can't see how NATO survives without the US being committed to it. Meanwhile, the US has to pick its battles because it can't be everywhere at once. And China is now a far bigger concern for US than Europe is.

[–] matcha_addict@lemy.lol 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

NATO is an instrument of US hegemony. I can't imagine they'd stop committing to it. They know there are too many who think Russia is a threat to them and will just do whatever to keep NATO alive. I don't think US would want to let go of something so useful to them.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago

At the end of the day the US doesn't see Russia as a primary threat, and they lack the resources to both fund NATO and threaten China. With the war in Ukraine having been lost, I expect that the US will leave Europe to deal with the fallout and refocus on Asia. If the war achieved its goals of accomplishing a regime change in Russia or even Balkanizing it, then it would be a different story. The US would absolutely invest into NATO to surround China from the west at that point. However, now that Russia has come out stronger, it would just be throwing good money after bad from US perspective.