Zivadin Jovanovic, the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals August 19th, 2016
NATO`S “Saint Trinity” – liberal capitalism, privileges of the West and uni-polar world
Interview to Chinese daily newspaper “People`s Daily” (Zhenminzhibao)
1. Recently NATO held its summit in Warsaw. Warsaw used to be the place to sign the Warsaw Treaty. Is there something special for NATO to choose such place to hold its summit?
Reply:
Choosing Warsaw for the last NATO summit reflects acceleration of NATO expansionist strategy toward East. Poland being, after Germany, the second largest and strongest country in the Baltic region plays very important role in the implementation of this strategy. In NATO plans Poland has particular role in overseeing Baltic Sea Basin and Baltic – Anatolia (Turkey) continental belt. Poland was first country to accept USA anti- rocket shield base on its territory, dislocation of so called rotating NATO commands, troops and weaponry. Generally, in the strategy of encircling and confronting Russia, USA relies more on fidelity and anti-Russian orientation of leaderships of former Warsaw Pact member countries than on some traditional West European allies. Probably, for the same reason, some earlier important NATO summits had also been held in East European countries: Check Republic (2002), Latvia (2006), and Rumania (2008).
2. As a counterpart of the Warsaw Treaty Organization, is there any necessity for NATO to exist? How should it transform itself in the changed situation?
Reply:
NATO was founded in 1949 as defensive alliance and Warsaw Pact six years later.
Fifty years after NATO became offensive Alliance. A turning point was 1999 NATO aggression on Serbia (Yugoslavia). It was engaged in an offensive action outside territory defined by own Founding Act, against the country which did not posed any danger to any NATO member state, violating UN Charter and undermining the role of UN Security Council. Although pretending to be democratic Alliance, Parliaments of member countries never approved such transformation.
NATO aims at achieving ultimate control of all world resources on behalf of multinational corporative capital, particularly on behalf of military-industrial, energy and financial sectors.
Analyzing NATO evolution from defense to aggressive force since the fall of Berlin Wall and dissolution of Warsaw Pact, it may be concluded that NATO has become armed feast spreading and serving the interests of : a) neo-liberal corporate capitalism; b) world-wide privileges of the West headed by USA; and c) uni-polar world order. That`s NATO`s “Saint Trinity”. This strategy has led, among other, to: arbitrary proclaiming of national interest of major NATO member countries beyond any territorial, political or moral standards; undermining of the World order established after the Second World War, especially, the UN System; rise of global mistrust and arms race; eroding of democratic parliamentary system; and militarization of political decision making to suit the interests of military industrial sector.
On the other side, unprecedented trends in the world towards multi-polarity, sovereignty and independence lead to conclusion that NATO aims are not achievable. Serious question – whether this is understood and accepted by NATO decision makers – remains, up to now, without convincing answer. History teaches us that imperial pattern of thinking has no firm sense of reality. And, exactly here lays the reason for great worry about our future.
Otherwise, frankly speaking, I do not believe that NATO could evolve into peace and justice-loving association. It has gone too far in reasoning that the might is right and that wherever the law blocks NATO objectives it`s got be removed.
NATO is a relic of Cold War era. It does not serve objectives of peace, justice and sovereign equality of nations. Therefore, in my opinion, it should be dissolved as Warsaw Pact was dissolved. Being large as it is, NATO can hardly escape gradual weakening by internal divisions and conflict of interests until its final destination – history of aggressors, with all accompanying records. Current NATO problems provoked by unsuccessful coup d’état in Turkey might appear only as a peak of approaching iceberg.
3. Did the enlargement of the NATO intensify the regional security? What effect has NATO made in the security of Balkans?
Reply:
USA/NATO policy of expansion to the East (new “Drang nach Osten” doctrine) is just a segment of their strategy of domination and hegemony in the world. The process which has been going on for some time now in the Far East and Pacific appears as blueprint of those in Central and Eastern Europe. Don’t we also hear of arms and forces deployments there, of NATO hybrid expansion, muscles showing military exercises, lining up of USA/NATO allies, old and new ones?
To justify its existence and growing military expenditure after the end of Cold War NATO has been engaged in producing tensions, mistrust, fear and false justifications for introducing global interventionism and militarism. Wherever NATO intervened, from Afghanistan and Iraq, to Libya and Mali it was leaving behind destroyed societies, fragmented states, hundreds of thousands of killed civilians, tens of millions of refugees and displaced persons, growing terrorism, tribal and religious wars, lasting misery and despair. Europe has been and still is collective victim of USA/NATO strategy of domination. Europe pays for USA/NATO hegemonic strategy, wars, sanctions, “colored revolutions”, “export of democracy”, regime changes etc. in terms of losses of sovereignty, development opportunities, own identity and dignity.
NATO was established as a regional Alliance. In the meantime it has been expanding in all parts of the world, including Far East and Pacific, trying to dominate globally. In addition to 28 formal members from Europe and North America, it has developed other forms of association, such as “Partnership for Peace”, special partnership and other arrangements which expand NATO associates to several dozens more. Thus, NATO today is present in almost all corners of the world including Pacific, Indian and Atlantic, including even, Sothern Atlantic (Couracao).
Concerning Balkan, it should be noted that NATO played crucial role in fragmenting two Yugoslavia (SFRY and FRY) and even Serbia, undermining basic principles of OSCE and UN Charter. In 90-es its member countries had been helping transfer of Bin Laden`s mujahidin from Afghanistan, Chechnya, Middle East and Maghreb countries to Bosnia`s civil war. They also financed, armed and trained UCK terrorists in Serbia`s Province of Kosovo and Metohija. During 1999 military aggression on Serbia (FRY) NATO allied with UCK. Then, in 2008 NATO member countries were the first ones to recognize unilaterally proclaimed independence of the Province.
Could all that be constructive, in the interest of stability and development? Today, USA/NATO tries to reinforce their domination in the Balkans, particularly to contain normal relations and cooperation of regional countries with traditional partners and friends like Russia and China.
4.
Moscow says the West is the aggressor, citing the eastward expansion of NATO. It has voiced its displeasure at the idea of any further enlargement. What do you think about it?
Reply:
USA/NATO openly treats Russia as their enemy. At the same time USA/NATO military bases have been mushrooming closer to western Russian boarders (Baltic Republics, Poland). Several USA so called missile shield defense bases have been installed at the doorstep of Russia, particularly in Poland, Rumania, and Bulgaria.
In recent years USA/NATO have established many new military bases in Europe. Today Europe hosts more foreign military bases and hardware then at the time of the peak of Cold War! The first of the large network of new bases was “Bondstil”, USA base in Serbian Province Kosovo and Metohija (under occupation) established immediately after the end of NATO 1999 aggression on Serbia (FRY). Following three USA bases were established in Bulgaria, then four in Rumania and so on, closer to the Russian boarders. Why, what for? Warsaw summit reaffirmed obligation of each member country to devise 2% of GDP for military spending thus further fueling arms race. What for? Decision was taken to dislocate new 5.000 NATO soldiers in Poland, Baltic republics, Rumania and Bulgaria. These are just liaison officers tasked to prepare conditions for dislocation of tens of thousands of forces, if and when USA/NATO decides so. What for? At the same time, NATO anti Russian propaganda is reminiscent of that of the Cold War time.
So, what else to expect from Russia than relevant answers to adequately protect own legitimate interests, first of all, security!
It is high time for western leadership, first of all USA, to recognize that military buildup,
threats to encircle Russia and China and Cold War rhetoric - lead to nowhere. Major international problems - economic and financial crisis, growing international terrorism, migration crisis, nuclear arms proliferation and all others - cannot be resolved by the logic of domination and uni-polar reasoning. The world has already changed bringing back full meaning of sovereign equality and real partnership in solving international problems.
There must be something seriously wrong with policy makers who proclaim for enemies those whom they badly need to solve own problems.
Luz María De Stéfano Zuloaga de Lenkait, Juristin und Diplomatin a.D.
12.11.16
ZDF-Sendung „Maybrit Illner“ am 10.11.16: „Trumps Triumph - Was steht auf dem Spiel?“,
ARD-Tagesschau vom 11.11.16
Die NATO ist passé und Von der Leyen völlig inkompetent.
Verlogenheit und Untauglichkeit der CDU und der regierenden Clique bloßgestellt
Die Verlogenheit und politische Untauglichkeit der CDU und der regierenden CDU/CSU/SPD-Clique Deutschlands sind seit langem vor der Öffentlichkeit bloßgestellt. Aber der Auftritt der Verteidigungsministerin Ursula von der Leyen bei Maybrit Illner im ZDF am 10.11.16: „Trumps Triumph - Was steht auf dem Spiel?“ übertraf alles bisher dagewesene an Inkompetenz und Verlogenheit.
CDU-Verantwortung für den Krieg in Syrien durch Komplizenschaft mit bewaffneten Mörder-Banden nicht zu verheimlichen
Es erschreckt, wie es die Verteidigungsministerin Ursula von der Leyen fertigbringt, völlig unverfroren vor dem deutschen Publikum zu lügen, um ihre Verantwortung und die ihrer Partei für den Krieg in Syrien durch Komplizenschaft mit bewaffneten Mörder-Banden weiter zu verheimlichen. Ihr muss bekannt und bewusst sein, dass die deutsche Regierung mit ihren Waffenverkäufen nach Saudi-Arabien und Katar indirekt die Terroristen in Syrien und im Irak unterstützt, abgesehen von den Finanzströmen, die ohne Eingreifen der Regierung ungehindert von Deutschland und anderen EU-Staaten aus die Terroristen-Hauptquartiere erreichen. Auch die Unterstützung der deutschen Regierung bei der Formation illegaler Truppen in der Türkei zum Sturz der amtlichen syrischen Regierung ist inzwischen Allgemeingut. Ja, es gab sogar schon Verfassungsentwürfe, formuliert in Berlin und bezahlt vom deutschen Steuerzahler, für eine neue syrische Verfassung! Was für eine unverschämte Einmischung in die inneren Angelegenheiten Syriens, was für ein anmaßender, frecher Bruch der UN-Charta! Eine solche abstoßend verfehlte, rechtswidrige Außenpolitik gegenüber Syrien will die CDU-Ministerin in teutonischer Überlegenheitsattitüde weiter in Komplizenschaft mit Terror-Banden betreiben und dies als völlig in Ordnung und vereinbar mit dem internationalen Recht darstellen. Ausgerechnet diese unzumutbare Ministerin für Verteidigung hat auch noch die Arroganz, den neu gewählten US-Präsidenten Donald Trump in Sachen Völkerrecht und Menschenrechten belehren zu wollen, gerade die internationalen Regeln, die sie und ihre CDU-Regierung längst am brutalsten in Syrien gebrochen haben. Wann hat sie Bedenken geäußert, mit der saudischen Monarchie oder mit Katar zuammenzuarbeiten? Hat sie einmal gegen den ständigen Bruch des Völkerrechts und Brutalitäten dieser Regierungen Position bezogen?
Destruktives illegitimes Bündnis als „Wertegemeinschaft“ bezeichnet: Von der Leyen muss weg.
Eine solche Frau darf kein Regierungsamt repräsentieren. Sie muss weg. Für menschliche Werte hat von der Leyen nicht den Funken von Verständnis. Menschliches Mitgefühl ist Fehlanzeige bei ihr. Sie ist die Funktionärin einer Partei, die beide, sie und ihre Partei, bald von der Bildfläche zu verschwinden haben, denn sie agieren menschenfeindlich. Ein destruktives illegitimes Bündnis als „Wertegemeinschaft“ zu bezeichnen, wie es Ursula von der Leyen bei Maybrit Illner tut (10.11.), ist die superlative absurde Vorstellung einer ignoranten oder einfach dummen CDU-Politikerin. Ist es für sie ein gemeinsamer Wert, Menschen anderer Länder, die kein anderes Land angegriffen haben, zu töten, Massenmord zu betreiben, um das vermeintliche gemeinsame Interessen Willen oder aus sonst irgendeinem fabulierten Grund, wie es mit Hilfe der „Wertegemeinschaft“ NATO geschieht?
Friedenspolitik und europäische Sicherheitsordnung von Lissabon bis Wladiwostok
Die Zeit ist schon lange reif, die Außenpolitik Europas als Friedenspolitik zu definieren. Dazu sind aber eine Ursula von der Leyen und ihre CDU nicht in der Lage. Sie, ihre Mitarbeiter und ihre CDU-Führung sind dafür völlig inkompetent. Das hat der Auftritt von Ursula von der Leyen bei Maybrit Illner noch einmal für jeden Beobachter sehr deutlich gezeigt. Die NATO ist passé. Zu recht sagt man im Kreis des neuen gewählten Präsidenten Donald Trump, die NATO sei „überflüssig
(Message over 64 KB, truncated)
