Is the NATO drawing its limits before the settlements or is it ready for the confrontation?

Written by Nasser Kandil,

The Conference of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has opened a debate in Warsaw through the symbolism which its owners wanted from it as a previous capital for the alliance which is led by Moscow a quarter-century ago, and in coincidence with the exit of Britain from the European Union, and through the circumstances which surround the future of the Union, that debate was about the function which the conference occupies in the roadmap and which the parties of the NATO want specially its American leadership. It is certain that this American leadership is the exclusive reference in the NATO’s decisions and its wars. So is it right what did many people say about the escalated meaning that was indicated by the outcomes of the conference as approaching from the borders of Russia from Kiev to Baltic?

First, it is clear that the conference is reintroducing the NATO at the expense of the role which was undertaken by the European Union during a quarter-century ago, from the fall of Berlin Wall, so it wants to rehabilitates the NATO with Britain at the expense of Germany in making the Western influence and the American in particular in confronting the threat of Russian expansion, which the Americans know that the collapse of the Union and the rise of the Russian role at the international level mean a reverse climax to what has happened before a quarter of a century from the withdrawal of the Russian umbrella and the joining of the European Union instead of the Russian Union, which included numbers of the countries which were part of the Soviet Union. As Romania and Bulgaria and elsewhere have chosen to join the West so maybe they will return back to the East, therefore the conference indicated that you can choose not to be European and to remain Atlantic and we will protect you and we will deploy our troops to protect your political regime as long as the European Union has entered the premature aging, but if the matter is offensive then the password is the Crimea, therefore it is sufficient that the conference indicated that the peace and the stability will not return back between Russian and the NATO, but only when the issues return back to what they were before the war of Ukraine, when the Crimea Peninsula was Ukraine and before any settlement that included Ukraine. Moreover the NATO will support every effort for the government of Kiev in order to restore its sovereignty over Crimea Peninsula hoping that Moscow will withdraw to prevent any collision, but did that happen? Or did the NATO receive the defeat and say; we call Moscow to support the implementation of Minsk Agreements which are dedicated to the inclusion of the Crimea to Russia, However it added implicitly that Russia has expanded, so we will draw the limits of the control, we will deploy our troops in the areas that belong to us, this is what we will do with the surplus of power which we have, which  is no longer benefit in the heart of Asia from Afghanistan to Iraq and Syria, we found ourselves obliged to resort to the settlements. But the final statement of the NATO did not mention in the paragraph that is dedicated to Syria neither  the overthrowing of the regime nor any insulting descriptions about the Syrian country, its army or its president, it was satisfied with just calling them to go on with a political solution, and to call the parties  for a real ceasing-fire.

When the NATO deploys its troops in affiliated countries to it, which were already joined its ranks many years ago within a political speech, putting high limits for the understanding with Russia as the restoration of Crimea by Ukraine, arranging for a transitional phase without a president in Syria, the extension of the military remaining in Afghanistan, and the pledge to undertake the requirements of the fortification against the terrorism as a result of the involvement of its opponents in civil wars, knowing that this was the speech of Hillary Clinton about Syria two years ago, then it is logic to conclude that the  NATO is moving toward the escalation, while when the NATO confirms the decision of the withdrawal from Afghanistan, and when it pledges to train the police and the army and to support the government there, as well as when it calls for international and regional understandings in the war on terrorism and when it does not repeat the issue of deploying the missile shield near the Russian borders, when it disregards the fate of Crimea, and when it addresses the Syrian President demanding, then the decision of deploying the troops become within the framework of drawing the lines of control before the settlements, and an attempt of anticipating shifts that are produced by the impasse of the European Union between its Eastern ranks which are close to Russia, and a pursuit to reassure their ruling elites which it supports them and which it will not abandon them, therefore NATO is a ready alternative to the European Union, and an implicit message to Russia that the rolling stones of the domino which occurred a quarter -century ago will not be repeated reversely now.

The most important message of the conference is that according to America Britain is more important than Gemmy in Europe, after the strike which affected the European Union, and that the Southern Korea is more important that Japan on the borders of China, furthermore, its deployed troops in Germany and Japan are mere front lines that the decision of their moving to any  place where there is neither the government of Berlin nor the government of Tokyo is taken by it, this means that the replacement of the economic alliances with the military alliance is paving the way for the reverse, the birth of economic alliances that include Germany with Russia and Japan with China.

The Conference of the NATO is a step forward in the American movement to hide two steps backwards, the first is the stating of the disintegration of the European Union in attracting the peoples of the Eastern Europe, the second is the expansion of Russia starting from Crimea where the first surrender of the geography of the NATO and its dominance was , and the rise of Russia as an international force from the gate of the Middle East wars at their forefront the war of Syria, where the NATO has crowded its fleets and where was its first military withdrawal.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,