• Riddick3001@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    At that point EU should have made it clear with how they all interpret that clause

    It’s become only relevant now because most European countries were under Nato art.5 protection, and there was no real doubt of interpretation.

    Now that the Nato art 5 is being eroded , the erosion of art 5 might trickle down to the European Defense Clause. So yes art 47 would need some reworking.

    On the other hand, EU and most individual membercountries should also have bi and/ or multi-lateral defensetreaties, so we should be good in most cases.