Interview to Chinese daily newspaper “People`s Daily” (Renmin Ribao)
Recently NATO held its summit in Warsaw. Warsaw used to be the place where the Warsaw Treaty was signed. Is there something special for NATO to choose such place to hold its summit?
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).
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?
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 the Berlin Wall and dissolution of the 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.
Did the enlargement of NATO contribute to regional security? What effect has NATO made in the security of the Balkans?
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.
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?
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.