I'm John Batchel with my colleague, Colonel Jeff McCausen, the United States Army retired CBS News, and a veteran of NATO.

So I've waited to comment about NATO's inability to move the story these days, these critical days, to respond to what appears to be an intention of the United States and Russia to negotiate an

end of the Ukraine war favorable to Russia without participation by the European Union members

or as far as I can see, the NATO members.

Now, UK and France are proposing a post-war air power over Ukraine, but that still leaves out the question

of Brussels.

Where is Brussels, Jeff?

It's got a hawkish attitude.

Rudy, the general secretary, certainly says the right things, but where are they?

Well, they're still on the fence, and it's far beyond the time that they should be

on the fence, John. And the problem with the good news of the NATO has always been the strength

of now 32 countries, and the bad news of NATO has always been 32 countries have to decide.

One goes back to 2014, a decision by all members to move to 2% of GDP for defense spending

as a goal, not a requirement, but a goal. And right now, only 23 of the 32 countries make that

2%. Mr. Rudy has been very outspoken already that actually all these countries should far exceed

3% if not more. Mr. Trump has demanded 5%.

But the only countries that are doing pretty well close to that number are probably the Baltic

republics, the Finns, Swedes, Poles, perhaps, and the like. Those are the only ones, not the primary,

not Britain, not France, not Germany for sure, which despite Mr.

Schultz's discussion of a site vending in the aftermath of the Russian invasion now three

years ago, still lags in about 1.4% of GDP.

So their ability to translate words into actions has been the problem and then to create a united front.

...