NATO aiming at world’s military divide
By Afshain Afzal
During the past 13 years of worst genocide, Washington had been claiming that Communism is no more threat for the world and it was Islamic fundamentalism that is the real danger and threat to the world peace. Interestingly, despites genocide of millions of fundamentalist Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen etc, Washington and its allies failed to calculate the consequence of its illegitimate intrusions and killings without trial on the regional and world peace. In the bloody cold war some decades back, Communism was dubbed as socio-political evil and all those countries which refused to join western pro-democratic block experienced worst form of economic, social and developmental sabotage. Finally, defeat of erstwhile Soviet Union in Afghanistan was celebrated as end to bipolarism as well as wiping out of Communist domination from the world. Finding no rival, such as WARSAW Pact countries, NATO tried to expand her muscles outside European configuration and intruded in many countries.
Ironically, despite US and its allies, experiencing defeat in Afghanistan, Washington is not ready to accept her defeat and still consider her as world’s sole super power. However, show of force by US in deploying missiles in Georgia, some years back, was reversed after Russian threat of military action. The ongoing politics in Ukraine, Crimea and Syria are also indicative that back bone of US has been broken down by Mujahideen in Afghanistan and its forces are only worth action films in cinemas. Today, US has neither the capacity nor will to challenge Russian or any nonconventional forces’ authority in any part of the world. To overcome the weakness, an attempt was made in the NATO’s Lisbon Summit of November 2010, to give “The new Strategic Concept” based on “cooperative security\” through new partnerships between NATO and non-NATO countries as well as organizations. One wonders NATO has already harmed certain neutral countries including Austria, Finland, Ireland, Sweden and Switzerland by dragging them controversial military alliance, how far this organization would go to divide this world on military lines.
As indicated earlier, after worst failure of US and allies at operational, tactical and strategic levels in Afghanistan, NATO decided to transform itself into a global political-military organization, basically to enhance collective defence through dialogue and new partnerships. However, no one can force a country to join poles and military alliances. Right of countries to remain non-aligned and neutral rests with the people and representatives of those countries. The dictatorship within NATO by US and Britain is felt badly by many European countries. France and Germany are nations, which always resisted domination in the opinion making. France rejoined NATO some years back on the condition that French freedom in decision making will be honoured, non contribution of French troops under NATO’s command during peacetime will be ensured and independence in her nuclear policy will not be contested. Although, the concerns of France were addressed to some extent but the question arises, would the new partners permitted to adopt the course of action France adopted to secure her national interests? We have example of Turkey, which was warned against agreement with China on joint production of missile system on the ground that these would not be compatible with NATO’s equipment and military hardware.
In the latest development, Russia has pulled back its military representative, General Valery Yevnevich from NATO Headquarters at Brussels against deployment of NATO forces on their Syrian border and Eastern European countries. NATO Secretary General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, is blaming Russia for violating principles and international commitments including commitment not to invade other countries. The Russians are also blaming NATO and the hidden hand behind them for disturbing status of quo and existing balance of power in the world. Although, the escalation between powers alliances including NATO versus SCO is not going to result in World War – III but many smaller countries would lose their identity, neutrality and even sovereignty. Puppet government of Afghanistan, under the pressure of western intruders, have already signed partnership agreement with NATO in the pursuit to become major non-NATO ally. Same thing was also done by then Pakistan’s un-democratically formed regime at that time by helping NATO at operational and tactical levels. Although, both the countries are availing NATO courses and have signed declarations but there is some time to get into formal partnerships.
In another development, in an emergency NATO’s moot, it was decided in principle to deploy NATO personnel in Eastern Europe. Two exercises have been planned in which NATO’s airborne commandos and rapid-reaction force would come into action. It would be on ground implementation of NATO’s Strategic Concept but the questions of sustainability of these military plans are the major irritants. Last year, there were some bitter experiences in NATO’s continuity in Afghanistan, when France and some other European Union countries pulled out their personnel from Afghanistan and also declined to pay their share for Afghanistan. The crisis inside NATO files has divided NATO into two poles; one led by US while the other by France. One wonders, when Washington and representatives of European Union / NATO countries try to persuade Pakistan and India to give up enmity and join one security block, why they forget to comprehend that union and friendly relations between Washington and Moscow is more relevant than the relations between countries of any other region.
In this contemporary world, although no one is permanent friend or foe but ideology matters a lot. On its basis, nations inherit unique cultures and traditions, which finally give birth to different civilizations. NATO’s objective to form new partnerships outside its neighbourhood and own region is not a bad idea but inherited defects in the organization plus the vested interests of powerful countries within the alliance will never allow the organization to reach its zenith. Libyan leader was martyred as a result of western terrorism only because he chalked out plan for the establishment of African Union within African continent. Somali leaders are also being hunted down on the same account. In Middle East, Oman, Qatar and UAE are being heavily armed to counter the potential leadership of Saudi Arabia. It is strange that regional alliances and blocks are not being allowed in Middle East and Africa.
Iran is being dragged in western alliance to counter fundamentalist Islam in Pakistan and Afghanistan. In Pakistan orthodox Muslims are being eliminated and their Mosques, Madarris and their Dar ul Ulooms being handed over to only those sectarian groups, which qualify western interfaith harmony standards? Interestingly, European Union countries are being threatened that fundamentalist Muslims have plans against them but US, Britain and most European countries are arming and funding Syrian fundamentalist Muslim against Syrian government. One wonder how long the hypocrisy against the neutral and non-aligned sovereign nations and its people will continue. Why on one hand fundamentalist Muslims are massacred while on other, they are armed and funded to overthrow democratic leaders. The question arises that should we allow the world to further divide into military camps.