10 ms·
> For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack: > on the territory of any of the Parties in
by jjk166 2y ago
> For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:
> on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
> on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
This would not be considered an armed attack, and it's debatable whether satellites in orbit would be considered aircraft over the territories covered by the treaty.
- beretguy 2y agoHow about an attack on an industrial plant in Berlin? Would that be worthy of Article 5? https://www.kyivpost.com/post/34662 https://www.kyivpost.com/post/34662
- jjk166 2y agoAgain, the key word here is armed - espionage related activities, even if they cause physical damage, don't generally count. There is some wiggle room, but the only attack that has led to an invocation of Article 5 to date has been the 9/11 terrorist attacks.