Article 5 is NATO not UN. And multiple European countries partook in operations there against the Taliban (the Afghani government at the time) not just Al Qaeda before the UN mission became a thing.
You can also look at Iraq in 2003 which was neither in response to an attack or UN sanctioned.
As for foreign policy each country does maintain its own foreign policy to a certain extent. And yet the largest countries in the EU are staunch allies of Israel.
multiple European countries partook in operations there against the Taliban (the Afghani government at the time) not just Al Qaeda
Since it was the Taliban who were sheltering Al-Qaida (and lying about it), as well as hosting other jihadi groups, that part actually made sense. There was no way to go after Al-Qaida without also confronting the Taliban. The complication was that the Taliban had been created and were still supported by the Pakistani ISI (their CIA equivalent) and by elements of the Pakistani military.
It could have been done diplomatically but that wasn’t even attempted. And if supporting and sheltering terrorists is the main factor then I can think of some of their allies that they’ve yet to act against
I’m not saying Article 5 is UN. I’m saying UN authorizes NATO operations (including the one initiated by triggering article 5) meaning Europe’s participation in Afgan invasion actually example of following international law, not selectively ignoring it
Article 5 is NATO not UN. And multiple European countries partook in operations there against the Taliban (the Afghani government at the time) not just Al Qaeda before the UN mission became a thing.
You can also look at Iraq in 2003 which was neither in response to an attack or UN sanctioned.
As for foreign policy each country does maintain its own foreign policy to a certain extent. And yet the largest countries in the EU are staunch allies of Israel.
Since it was the Taliban who were sheltering Al-Qaida (and lying about it), as well as hosting other jihadi groups, that part actually made sense. There was no way to go after Al-Qaida without also confronting the Taliban. The complication was that the Taliban had been created and were still supported by the Pakistani ISI (their CIA equivalent) and by elements of the Pakistani military.
It could have been done diplomatically but that wasn’t even attempted. And if supporting and sheltering terrorists is the main factor then I can think of some of their allies that they’ve yet to act against
I’m not saying Article 5 is UN. I’m saying UN authorizes NATO operations (including the one initiated by triggering article 5) meaning Europe’s participation in Afgan invasion actually example of following international law, not selectively ignoring it
NATO has nothing to do with the UN.
They later did make it a UN mission but from September through December it was an unsanctioned invasion
Sure, but that goes against the point you’re trying to make.
How so?
I’d like to preemptively note that the UN resolution regarding Afghanistan didn’t happen until December while the invasion began in September.