NATO finds its legitimacy by destabilizing the world.
Why does NATO exist?
Not to bring “democracy and freedom” in countries it claims to be authoritarian, and no, not even to maintain the global peace. In reality, it exists to destabilize different regions of the world and then come as a savior to bring back stability. Anywhere NATO goes to “bring back stability,” after a little research into the history of that region you’d find that the region was destabilized by NATO in the first place.
This phenomenon has been called the “fateful geographical paradox: that NATO exists to manage the risks created by its existence” by professor Richard Sakwa.
Bonnie Glaser, director of the Asia program at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, told Bloomberg that Washington’s haste to prepare everyone for another major conflict could “end up provoking the war that we seek to deter.”
“NATO should be renamed ASFP: the Alliance for Self Fulfilling Prophecies,” tweeted commentator Arnaud Bertrand of the alliance’s discussions about Taiwan.
“A defensive alliance doesn’t look to pick fights with a country on a different continent,” tweeted Jacobin’s Branko Marcetic.
This has been proved many times throughout its existence with the Ukraine crisis being the most recent example. It’s true that without NATO, there’d be no one to assist Ukraine in its fight against the Russian aggression because there’d be no NATO to provoke the Russian aggression. It’s a well-documented fact that this war was provoked by NATO’s expansion toward Russia which can’t be argued against without pulling Putin’s historical comments out of context. Also, many Western scholars and officials were aware that the West’s actions are going to trigger a war in Europe way before the war started.
At some point in the future, we’re definitely going to see NATO’s “fateful geographical paradox” in respect to China as the so-called “peaceful organization” continues to work toward “restraining” China by destabilizing the region first and then going there as a hero to re-stabilize it.
China was labeled a security threat by NATO this year for the first time in its history, and since then Washington has been working to provoke China. From Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in early August to pressuring its European allies to harden their stance on China, a pattern emerges which shows that NATO deliberately wants to provoke China into projecting aggression toward Taiwan so that it can then protect Taiwan’s “freedom.”
The same is true in case of Iran,
There is one similarity in “confronting” Iran, “protecting” Ukraine, and “restraining” China: protecting the unipolar world order led by the US from disruption by the Global South. That’s the reality of, or I should say, the fundamental cause of NATO’s extremely risky operations in a world which is one button press away from total destruction.
Even the war in Ukraine is not ultimately about Ukraine, not even about Russia, it’s larger goal is to confront China’s rise on the global stage. As explained by Ted Snider in an article titled “It was never about Ukraine.”
“The war in Ukraine has always been about larger US goals,” writes Snider. “It has always been about the American ambition to maintain a unipolar world in which they were the sole polar power at the center and top of the world.”
“Events in Ukraine in 2014 marked the end of the unipolar world of American hegemony,” Snider says. “Russia drew the line and asserted itself as a new pole in a multipolar world order. That is why the war is ‘bigger than Ukraine,’ in the words of the State Department. It is bigger than Ukraine because, in the eyes of Washington, it is the battle for US hegemony.”
“If Ukraine is about Russia, Russia is about China,” Snider writes. “The ‘Russia Problem’ has always been that it is impossible to confront China if China has Russia: it is not desirable to fight both superpowers at once. So, if the long-term goal is to prevent a challenge to the US led unipolar world from China, Russia first needs to be weakened.”
NATO is not anti-war, it provokes a war first and then promotes its own agendas in the name of opposing the war. Only when you see NATO as the savior do you believe its existence is justified, and that worldview stays relevant as long as its real nature stays hidden from the mainstream rank-and-file. In other words, as long as people believe that NATO involved in Ukraine only after 24 Feb 2022, the organization will be seen as virtuous and noble as it protects an “independent” country from a ruthless dictator, therefore, it must exist. And when you peep into the history of that region, this entire empty narrative that “NATO is a defensive organization” gets crushed into pieces as you find its fingerprints all over Ukraine.
NATO is legitimized as long as we only see the part when it goes to protect a nation or a region from the aggressor while ignoring the part where it triggered that aggression in the first place; in short, NATO’s legitimacy relies upon ignorance. Therefore, it makes sure that people don’t wake up to their ignorance by subjecting them to hardcore propaganda.
As the US keeps loosing its iron fist over the world and as more countries are becoming dissident to the US-led world order, we can expect the megalomaniacs in Washington and their masters to act in an even more crazy way. If you’ve seen the narcissists in your life, you’d know that they lose control over themselves and become abusive once they realize that things aren’t going their way. The US as a government institution, not as a republic, is a narcissist on the world stage. It would rather see the world burn in fire than see it becoming multipolar.
Thank You for reading the entire article. I would love to hear feedback from you.
Put some coins in my digital hat if you like my work:
Every day, I do my best to bring my best to your screens, but I can’t do it full-time without your support. If you find my work valuable, I hope you become a one-time or regular donor to my Patreon account here. Any amount is more than appreciated.
Talk to me on Twitter:
SUBSCRIBE FOR FREE: