NATO: E Pluribus Unum ? Seems nice. BUT !! What are the potential pitfalls?

[sear]

"US says it's time for Finland, Sweden to join NATO" Yahoo News​

E Pluribus Unum?

Might seem OK.

"E Pluribus Unum" is the motto on the "Great Seal" of the United States.
Seems like not a problem. Right?
Perhaps, until we consider 19th Century history, and the U.S. War Between The States, or as some in the South have called it, "The War of Northern Aggression".

Contentions arose, and musket balls began a flyin'. Hundreds of thousands died.

It's a new millennium. Weapons are orders of magnitude more deadly now. And the spectrum of personality profiles of the member States is broader in NATO in 2023 than it was each side of the Mason-Dixie in 1861.

It may seem cordial to welcome Finland & Sweden into the NATO family. But Turkey? "What could possibly go wrong?"

Is it a question of whether or not there will be military action between NATO member nations? Or is it merely a question of when? Anything to be done to minimize this risk?

ref:
E Pluribus Unum is Latin for "out of many, one."

What Does 'E Pluribus Unum' Mean?

You may have noticed the phrase, 'E Pluribus Unum' on U.S. coins and currency. Learn about the meaning of this phrase, its significance, and history.

www.thesprucecrafts.com

 

[Borg Refinery]

Isn't Turkey already in NATO and hasn 't it been in NATO for ages..?

 

[sear]

Isn't Turkey already in NATO and hasn 't it been in NATO for ages..?

Turkey is indeed a NATO member nation. But the issue is not chronology. It's culture, socio-political compatibility & like interests.

A useful example is Russia. After the Cold War it was suggested perhaps Russia should join NATO. After WWII Germany became a NATO member.
[Former West] Germany has been a welcome NATO member, providing constructive contributions to the security of the alliance.

But (now unified) Germany's culture is compatible with many other NATO members.
Remember when the E.U. was forming? Knowing that international border restrictions would be relaxed within a European Union there was some concern that if Turkey were a full E.U. member it might cause immigration problems for the other E.U. members.

In that context perhaps you recognize Turkey is less than a perfect fit for either the E.U., or NATO.

As mentioned Finland and Sweden aren't much of a stretch.

But from now on should additional NATO membership application include a practical compatibility analysis? Further, what if a current member (Turkey for example) drifts from values shared by the other NATO members? Radical Islam is but one obvious regional example. Let it ride? Deal with it on the battlefield when the time comes? Or ...

Currently joining NATO requires unanimous NATO member nation approval.
Should NATO have a practical means to either discipline errant NATO members, or expel an errant member?