One aspect of the US push for an increase in military budgets
on the part of its NATO partners is closely wed to the fact that such spending
all but demands large purchases from US military contractors. The Europeans
know this and yet they are torn.
On the one hand some within the EU and NATO circles believe
there is an external threat from the East and genuinely wish to increase spending
and step up the US footprint in Central Europe. Poland in particular has
embraced this mindset and the NATO debate must also be reckoned in light of
Poland's increasingly strained relationship with the EU.
Others are not quite as keen to embrace the NATO programme of
aggression toward Moscow. In that same vein, there is a growing sense of unease
when it comes to Washington and its commitments to Atlanticism. Trump's status
post 2020 will greatly affect the future of NATO as will the trajectory of the Republican
Party in the United States. Will Trumpism become the new orthodoxy? Another
four years of Donald Trump will go a long way in securing that legacy.
With Britain marginalised, France and Germany now dominate
the EU and with the uncertainty that surrounds NATO, Berlin and Paris are
slowly creeping toward creating a new EU military force, something that would undermine
NATO and eliminate its ostensible raison d'être.
Through
NATO the United States has continued to militarily occupy portions of Europe since
the end of World War II. The Nativists in Washington are at times ideological
isolationists. Others in Washington have stepped up American Imperialism to the
point of blatant unilateralism. Europe and other 'allies' are not even to be
publically spoken of as 'partners' but their status as satraps is to become
formalised and they must submit. If they won't, the unilateralists would punish
them and overthrow their regimes.
Others within the US political spectrum (in their often willful
ignorance) bask in American power and yet don't understand how it functions and
how it has worked since the end of the world wars. And yet straddling these
various camps are those who would make money by fomenting militarism. They will
work the angles however the chips may fall. Regardless whether the motives are hubris,
avarice or ignorance it would seem NATO's future is riding a knife-edge. Once
again the world will be watching as Americans play the great electoral game in
2020.
As a sign of further schism,
Of course (as expected) Zelenskiy has since won the run off.
But this move by Macron (in supporting the wrong candidate) won't soon be
forgotten. It demonstrates that he's not submissive to Washington. Not fully on
board with the US agenda, Macron (though himself under great domestic pressure)
is increasingly defiant in terms of Washington's demands.
Speaking of defiance and military spending, there's the
question of the F-35's and Turkey. America is using the killing machine as an
economic and diplomatic 'weapon' against Turkey, attempting to force it into
conformity over its S-400 missile deal with the Kremlin. But the threats are
producing the opposite result... Ankara is instead cozying up to Moscow. Will
Turkey leave NATO? Not any time soon and probably not of its own will but
NATO's effectiveness and authority are being weakened and undermined. Will it
stand if it's actually put to a test? Few would want to risk it at the moment.
Additionally there's another aspect to the F-35 story. The Pentagon
does not want to see the S-400 system tested vis-à-vis the F-35. Aside from the
geopolitics and strategic planning, this aspect of the deal is viewed as a
security threat and one Washington will not soon forgive and thus they're more
than willing to forfeit the deal despite the loss in profits.
One wonders where Turkey will turn? Will they turn to Russia
or China or will France step in and fulfill its 'alternative' role that so
often frustrates Washington. Will Turkey turn to something like the Rafale?
While not exactly the same type of aircraft it may meet Ankara's needs and its
desire to replace its fleet of American made F-16's. Turkey has already
indicated they're looking for non-American alternatives and yet their domestic
programmes have lagged. A deal with the French or someone else will certainly
anger Washington but if Erdogan starts purchasing Russian Su-57's, then it's
hard to imagine NATO remaining idle or docile. It would represent an
unprecedented crisis, clearly surpassing the alliance's problems with France
and Greece during the Cold War.
The collapse of NATO would represent a moral victory. Even
those who viewed it as moral or necessary struggled to maintain the narrative
when the Warsaw Pact collapsed. Since that time its mission and expansion have
been blatantly imperialistic and it represents a viable danger to global peace.
However its collapse also presents real dangers. There is no
good solution here. So it is in a fallen world. A NATO collapse may exacerbate
already growing tensions within the EU. I daresay a fractured Europe absent
NATO and a collapsed Union would be akin to pressing the 'refresh' button of
European geopolitics. The ghosts of history will rear their heads and that can
only mean one thing.... war.
We as Christians can never support or encourage nations
shedding blood and so those who would be invested within the sociopolitical
order have a dilemma. It is always better to disengage and yet tell the full
truth, warn and expose the lies on all sides. If by God's grace some listen and
as a result carefully and gingerly dismantle these Towers of Babel or whether
things continue on as they are, we've done our job. Like Noah we build the ark
and condemn the world. And the ark is the Church, not Western Civilisation. The
Pseudo-Ark/Pseudo-Zion of the West is a chronicle of blood, theft and lies.
That's not going to change. It's wonderful to see evil designs collapse and
fail but the victory is shallow when they only produce more evil. I will rejoice
if NATO collapses but then I will also tremble.
See also:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.