- Today
- Holidays
- Birthdays
- Reminders
- Cities
- Atlanta
- Austin
- Baltimore
- Berwyn
- Beverly Hills
- Birmingham
- Boston
- Brooklyn
- Buffalo
- Charlotte
- Chicago
- Cincinnati
- Cleveland
- Columbus
- Dallas
- Denver
- Detroit
- Fort Worth
- Houston
- Indianapolis
- Knoxville
- Las Vegas
- Los Angeles
- Louisville
- Madison
- Memphis
- Miami
- Milwaukee
- Minneapolis
- Nashville
- New Orleans
- New York
- Omaha
- Orlando
- Philadelphia
- Phoenix
- Pittsburgh
- Portland
- Raleigh
- Richmond
- Rutherford
- Sacramento
- Salt Lake City
- San Antonio
- San Diego
- San Francisco
- San Jose
- Seattle
- Tampa
- Tucson
- Washington
Clovis Today
By the People, for the People
Opinion: NATO Members Should Be Careful
Rube Render argues NATO members must understand the limits of Article 5 commitments.
Mar. 18, 2026 at 12:00am
Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›
The author argues that the American public is under the mistaken impression that if a NATO country is attacked, the other NATO members are automatically required to join the attacked country in combat against the aggressor. However, the author states that this is not the case, as Article 5 of the NATO agreement only requires members to take such action as they deem necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. The author raises this issue in the context of Ukraine's demand for 'Article 5 like' security guarantees, and the current war in the Middle East involving a NATO member (USA) and a non-member (Israel).
Why it matters
This opinion piece highlights the need for NATO members to fully understand the limits of their Article 5 commitments, as misunderstandings about the extent of these obligations could lead to unintended escalation of conflicts or reluctance to provide necessary support to allies.
The details
The author argues that the American public is under the mistaken impression that if a NATO country is attacked, the other NATO members are automatically required to join the attacked country in combat against the aggressor. However, the author states that this is not the case, as Article 5 of the NATO agreement only requires members to take such action as they deem necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. The author raises this issue in the context of Ukraine's demand for 'Article 5 like' security guarantees, and the current war in the Middle East involving a NATO member (USA) and a non-member (Israel).
- The current war in the Mid-East has once again brought talk about a coalition of the willing, to join a NATO member (USA) and a non-member of NATO (Israel) in a shooting war that they started.
The players
NATO
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, a military alliance of 30 member states from North America and Europe.
Ukraine
A country that has been a de-facto member of NATO for the last four years, and has demanded 'Article 5 like' security guarantees.
United States
A NATO member country involved in the current war in the Middle East.
Israel
A non-NATO member country involved in the current war in the Middle East.
Rube Render
The author of the opinion piece, a former Clovis city commissioner and former chair of the Curry County Republican Party.
What’s next
The current war in the Middle East involving a NATO member and a non-member is still in its early stages, and it remains to be seen how NATO members will respond and what the broader implications will be.
The takeaway
This opinion piece highlights the need for NATO members to fully understand the limits of their Article 5 commitments, as misunderstandings about the extent of these obligations could lead to unintended escalation of conflicts or reluctance to provide necessary support to allies.


