The consequence of this public discussion about payment and collective defence is that it completely undermines deterrence. In the past, it was always assumed that there was a political commitment, let alone article 5, that if an ally was attacked, they would have the support of all the other allies combined. The fact that the U.S. has now opened up a loophole or wiggle room on this undermines deterrence. It undermines deterring a potential adversary from taking a run at the Baltics, for instance, in this case by Russia. We've undermined deterrence at a time when Mr. Putin has become a greater risk-taker than ever. Nobody thought he would take a run at Crimea—I have to say that on the intelligence side—prior to the event.
At a very time when Russia is more unpredictable, and Putin is going to be there for a long time, NATO has on its own, to Putin's delight, undermined its own deterrence. The combination of an adversary in Moscow and this kind of shooting-yourself-in-the-foot policy is extremely unhelpful and has led to exactly what Dick has said in terms of what those countries are facing.