[binarray2000]

2018 Macedonian referendum is one example of the contrarian. It was invalid as the turnout was mere 36.89% (most were probably Albanians). And (I think) in non other country that is a NATO member now, there was a referendum.

For a broader perspective: NATO was created to “keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” (from the horse's mouth)

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/declassified_137930.htm

EDIT: For even broader perspective: Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island; who rules the World-Island commands the world. — Mackinder, Democratic Ideals and Reality, p. 150

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geographical_Pivot_of_Hi...

[ido]

Unless there was foul play involved, if among 36.89% majority voted to join NATO and the rest didn't care enough to vote - isn't that an argument in favor of joining?

[binarray2000]

According to the Macedonian constitution, the turnout must be over 50%. Hence the boycot.

And, what does that say about the oh-so-democratic West if less than 40% people turn out and it still "accepts" a country as a member?

[ido]

That's where more context is needed - was the low turn over a protest vote (or protest lack of vote)? Was it indifference? Was it sabotage by the government (making voting hard)? I think these questions will determine the answer.

[nicbou]

Was it a boycott or indifference?

[forum_ghost]

Referendums, especially binding referendums, generally have high thresholds.

Maybe an argument, but a very weak one.