NATO Expansion
Five years ago, Emmanuel Macron declared that NATO was experiencing “brain death”. However, at the NATO summit in July 2024, NATO committed the West’s democracies to an era of institutionalised war, violence, and disorder, with Russia and China being “normalised” as permanent enemies. After praising the “remarkable progress” of European members spending more and more on weaponry, President Biden asserted that “Ukraine can and will stop Putin. Russia is failing in this war and NATO makes us all safer. We all know Putin will not stop at Ukraine”.
None of those statements bears a remote relationship with reality or truth. Moscow has no designs on Europe and as Chicago University Professor of Political Science, John Mearsheimer remarked, Biden’s speech was “poppycock, full of deluded statements”.
The NATO summit marked a turn in the alliance towards complete abandonment of any pretence of NATO as a defence organisation in favour of increasingly aggressive posturing[i] The NATO declaration expressed no interest in a negotiated peace for Ukraine. The NATO chief, Stoltenberg has championed a greater role for NATO to counter China, claiming that China wants to see the United States fail, Europe fracture, and NATO falter. That too is “poppycock”.
Macron was right five years ago – NATO really is brain-dead. At the conclusion of the NATO summit, the Consortium News wrote that NATO’s members were “collectively losing their minds.” Earlier predictions that open-ended expansion of NATO eastward would lead to a Europe “whole, free, and at peace” looks hollow today with a brutal war raging in Ukraine and relations with Russia in the deep-freeze[ii].
The European and American leaders who negotiated with Mikael Gorbachev promised that in exchange for the withdrawal of Soviet troops and Gorbachev agreeing to the reunification of Germany, there would be no eastward expansion of NATO. There is ample evidence of this in the National Security Archive at George Washington University where declassified documents show that security assurances against NATO expansion were given by Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner. To read this document, Click here: NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard
Bush senior agreed at the end of the Cold War that there would be “No winners and no losers”. However, Bush subsequently changed his attitude saying, “To hell with that!” – “We prevailed, they didn’t”. What this demonstrates, more than anything is that trust in a statement from the United States at the most senior levels means nothing in the absence of an ironclad written commitment.
Asia
NATO displayed contempt for the kind of peaceful co-existence which the ASEAN nations have developed through compromise and understanding, despite their differing political ideologies. The Asian countries do not want to see a NATO presence in their neighbourhood and even India does not have a “NATO mentality”. Kishore Mahbubani, formerly Singapore’s ambassador to the United Nations has warned of the danger of NATO’s Indo-Pacific shift, fearing that it could export its militaristic culture to East Asia.
The ASEAN member nations do not see China as an existential threat but rather as an economic opportunity. Indonesia’s Prabowo Subianto wants his country to continue its cooperation with China. Malaysia’s Prime Minister, Anwar Ibrahim wants the US and China to act in a manner consistent with regional cooperation. Even the Philippines is having second thoughts about acting as a front for Washington’s containment of China.
Peacekeeping
Russia continues to call for a diplomatic resolution of the conflict in Ukraine. Trump has claimed that if he is re-elected, he will end the Russia-Ukraine war. Trump’s instinct is to negotiate with Russia, something which most of Europe rejects.
Even though Hungary is a NATO member, its Prime Minister Viktor Orban recently met with Xi Jinping on a “peacekeeping mission” where the Chinese leader called for a ceasefire in Ukraine and direct dialogue between Moscow and Kyiv. That meeting followed shortly after Orban’s trips to both Kyiv and Moscow where Putin reiterated Moscow’s readiness to resolve hostilities through negotiations. Orban’s meeting with Putin met with anger from other EU leaders.
Turkey is also a member of NATO but it’s President Erdogan maintains direct dialogue with the West, Kyiv, and Moscow. For Turkey, settlement of the conflict in Ukraine is a key priority.
Who will speak on behalf of peace if not Trump, Putin, Orban or Erdogan?
Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)
The SCO held its 24th summit on 4 July 2024 in Kazakhstan, only days before the NATO summit. It’s members (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, India, Pakistan, Iran, and Belarus) bring together countries representing 80% of the Eurasian landmass, 40% of the global population and nearly 30% of global GDP. The SCO also has 14 “dialogue partners” from Asia and the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia. These nations are moving to establish an indivisible, Eurasia-centric collective security framework[iii].
Kazakhstan’s president chaired the summit, saying that the group had a great responsibility to strengthen peace, stability, and security. China’s President Xi Jinping talked of the SCO upholding a “common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security system” while Uzbekistan talked of building on the initial “Shanghai Spirit” of unity, a sentiment echoed by the other leaders at the summit.
The world is witnessing the reconfiguration of the existing international order. China and Russia have ambitions to turn the SCO into a counterweight to the West. The SCO and BRICS are the main pillars of the new world order. It would be a mistake for the West to dismiss the SCO as insignificant[iv]. Turkey draws attention to the shortcomings of the current international order saying that the SCO is working to build an effective international system embracing the whole of humanity, promoting peace, security, stability, and prosperity.
The SCO’s aim of creating a Eurasia-centric collective security framework recognises the sovereign autonomy of independent nations in a multipolar world. Western think tank mandarins should pay attention. It may not be all plain sailing for NATO.
BRICS & THE GLOBAL SOUTH
The next BRICS Summit is scheduled to be held in Russia from 22-24 October 2024. Currently, BRICS membership is made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa with four new members namely Iran, Ethiopian, Egypt, and UAE having joined in January 2024. Although the BRICS countries have significant differences in their political, economic, social, and cultural positions, the Group’s guiding principle is realism and national interests rather than idealism. Foremost amongst its aims are “True Multilateralism” and a strict commitment to “non-interference” in each country’s internal affairs. BRICS aims to advance the agenda of the Global South. Today, BRICS nations account for half the world's population and two-fifths of world trade. More than 30 other nations currently seek BRICS membership. They include Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam. Turkey has indicated that it may also consider joining BRICS.
While the US and the West regard “Democracy V Autocracy” as critical issues, countries of the Global South focus instead on development, poverty alleviation, food, energy, health, and peace, while seeking a greater role in international affairs and the establishment of a new and fairer international order. Josep Borrell, the European Union’s top diplomat has recently acknowledged that the “Era of Western dominance has definitively ended” adding that “Improving our relations with the Global South is one of the four main tasks on the EU’s geopolitical agenda”.
The West sees China’s BRI through the lens of “systemic rivalry” but, for the Global South the BRI aligns with its principles of cooperation and of offering opportunities for collaboration, mutual benefit and shared prosperity.
In the meantime, the world is witnessing the deterioration of American finances and maximum political dysfunction. Its national debt approaches US$35 trillion and the Democrats and Republicans are barely on speaking terms.
“AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM” – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE!
__________________________
[i] ‘Brain Dead’ & Dangerous, NATO proceeds, by Patrick Lawrence, Consortium News, July 2024
[ii] Stephen Walt, professor of international relations at Harvard University, July 2024
[iii] Asia Times, J.M. Piedra, July 2024
[iv] NATO summit matched by a rise of rival SCO, Asia Times July 2024, Stefan Wolff
댓글