"Crow's settlement" of NATO. Alliance has entered the age of survival
In the middle of this week, another NATO summit will be held in London. It will probably take place in a "warm and friendly atmosphere", that is, without firing and fights, but there will be plenty of abuse there. Although they will try to leave her behind closed doors.
"Raven settlement"
What makes such works as “12 chairs” and “Golden Calf” by Ilf and Petrov good is that you can find a quote for almost any situation in them if you wish. Looking at the situation inside the NATO bloc, for some reason, Raven's Settlement comes to mind - a "large communal apartment number 3", whose inhabitants could not stand each other, being forced to be on the same living space. They were also extremely afraid of the fire, and in the end they convinced themselves that the common house would burn out - and it burned down because it had been set on fire from several ends at once. The expression "raven's settlement" has become both synonymous with the communal apartment and the relationships in it, as well as the work collective, where intrigues and gossip flourish. An equally friendly collective is the North Atlantic Alliance, of course, with some differences.
Despite the fact that the NATO leadership tells tales of the indestructible unity of the alliance, which celebrated its 70 anniversary, unity does not smell like these days. However, Mr. Stoltenberg, who was put on his post to carry the necessary coloring nonsense, echoed in the US State Department.
"The US still believes that NATO remains the most successful alliance in stories. The President and Secretary of State have clearly indicated their support for the alliance for several years. We continue to play a key leadership role in it, ""
- said the representative of the State Department.
"The most successful alliance"
What is the success of NATO, he did not specify. In the duration of its existence? Well, if only in this ... And in the successful shaking out of the overlord of the alliance, the United States, of money for the procurement of weapons by NATO members, and of actions that often went against the real goals of European states. In this, the alliance also succeeded for a long time. Among the members? And what's the use of these members? The first thing that the neophytes of the 90s and 2000s did when joining NATO was sawing their armies and arsenals to the damn grandmother, because now they are in NATO, together they are a gang and no one will touch them! And America will somehow protect everyone. So everyone thought (again the same logic of a bad communal apartment), as a result, the current armies of even the former great European powers of the army of even some Algeria — by one tooth, and many others, which at the end of the 80’s had quite decent aircraft, making their decent a contribution to the treasury of the power of the then NATO, - and in bulk they will go for the same one tooth. And about the former members of the internal affairs bodies there is nothing to say - of all, some kind of army was preserved only in Poland, consumed by centuries-old pain in the landing site in relation to Russia. The pain and fear hidden behind the bravado that will once again be received from Russia over the protruding parts of the body, and for the cause. Only this will be the last time for Poland.
The alliance also has no successful military campaigns - neither in Afghanistan, nor in Iraq, nor in Libya, nor in Mali the goals that they set for themselves, if they were achieved, then half. It was possible to disassemble the building, but to build something that suits the builders, no.
Make your contributions!
In addition, in the “united as never before” alliance, strife is growing between the United States, as the only valuable and strongest member of the alliance, and all the others, and these processes are only intensifying. America under Trump quite rightly believes that Europeans should pay more for themselves in the field of defense, and the United States to unfasten. Therefore (back to the "12 chairs" and analogies from there), the alliance summits are increasingly similar to the meetings of the "Sword and Oral Union", and in the role of the "Turkish citizen's son", of course, is Trump, who calls for "making contributions," and those present, except for Nikeshi’s fools and Vlady, in whose roles the mighty nano-powers of the Baltic states, and the mechanic Polesov, willingly carry the latter, are trying to fend off and refer to the egalitarian tax and difficult times. But Ostap, excuse me, Donald, is implacable, and they promise to give something to him. True, they are not always executed, and not immediately, in contrast to the novel, in cash.
Europeans, in addition to the Poles and the "Baltic extinctions" with poor Albanians, ignore the demand of the alliance and the United States to spend 2% of GDP on defense by almost all means. Someone promises to spend so much, but later, someone simply says that he can’t. But in words everyone is very sorry and will certainly try. Then, someday, like the Germans, promising to achieve the norm in 2027 year. Obviously, in Berlin they wait until the donkey or the padishas die, recalling the famous parable of Khoja Nasreddin. At the same time, Europeans are sincerely outraged by such pressure and make attempts to jump off the American hook, responding to Trump in return. French President Macron even announced the "brain death" of NATO, hinting that the alliance is similar to a person with a healthy body, but already dead brain, lying in a coma with the help of apparatuses that support vital functions. And the brain, of course, is the USA.
Cramolny Emmanuel Bonaparte
Macron generally recently expressed a lot of seditious. For example, he called on NATO leaders to review the alliance’s strategy when they meet in London next week, and said that he should focus on the threat of terrorism, not Russia.
“Is Russia our enemy today?” Or is China? Is this NATO's goal to designate them as enemies? I do not think so",
—Macron said at a joint press conference in Paris with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.
“Our common enemy today in NATO is terrorism, which hit every one of our countries ... NATO is an alliance of collective defense. And who is our common enemy? What are our common problems? These are questions that deserve clarification. ”
Seeing how the cartridge grew bolder, Florence Parley, the Minister of Defense of France, also went on the attack (before that, she dared only attack with words the malicious Russian satellites). She stated that the United States should not impose US-made weapons on NATO allies on the pretext of Atlantic solidarity.
"We must not allow the 5-th article of the NATO Charter to turn under pressure from Washington into a" F-35 article ", which would oblige NATO countries to buy American weapons,"
- emphasized the minister.
She added that Europe should create military instruments that "would be consistent with its economic and political power." There are fears that Madame Minister is extremely overestimating the power of Europe.
“NATO will never be an instrument of our sovereignty, Europeans themselves must build it,” Parley explained. “Sovereign Europe and NATO should mutually reinforce each other.” She remembered the words of her patron about the "death of NATO's brain", noting that Macron was trying to encourage members to the necessary discussion. “The president of the republic pointed out the issues that had long arisen in the organization,” the minister said. “These words are dictated by the will to start the necessary discussion in order to give new impetus to the foundations of the alliance.” “That should be at the center of our debate on Wednesday at the London summit,” Parley added.
It is clear that France, for all this attack on Washington and NATO, sees for itself the strengthening of its position and the occupation of a certain throne of "the main force of European NATO," the spokesman, so to speak, of the aspirations of old Europe.
Turkish bully, which so far has to endure
It is ridiculous that Macron opposed “brain death” by none other than Turkish President Erdogan! Moreover, in a rude form and, in fact, having cheated on him, they say, this is his "brain death". Why would Erdogan suddenly intercede for NATO, and even more so for the United States, with which he himself is on his knives? However, Erdogan is often impulsive and difficult to predict, and sometimes he would not be able to explain his statements.
Turkey itself is now in NATO a kind of “infan terribble”, from which it would be necessary to get rid of it, and it’s scary. With all its low combat readiness, slackness and gouging, the Turkish Armed Forces are very numerous (despite the fact that during the reign of Erdogan they almost halved), they are decently armed, and Turkey is located in a key area of Southern Europe. Due to Washington's stupid policy towards Ankara, which was expressed in many steps, including an unsuccessful putsch, and was aggravated by a hysterical reaction to the purchase of C-400, the Turks are extremely negative about the United States, the alliance, and their stay there. But so far they have not indicated their movement to the exit. Perhaps they just want the other side to file for "divorce"? Meanwhile, they simply do what they want: expand military and other cooperation with the Russian Federation, with which they had not been brought before the war, go on a secret review of several provisions of the Montreux Convention in relation to the Russian Navy, etc.
At the same time, it is becoming more and more difficult to “squeeze” the Turks in supplying them with arms: “import substitution” in Turkey is also gradually being carried out, and the country produces a lot of its weapons, albeit with a large share of foreign components. They pressed the Turks with fighters - they went to Moscow. Press, say, with engines for tanks - The address is again known to them, where they will be helped. At the same time, the Turks, referring to the position of the alliance with regard to the Kurds, blocked the adoption of the defense plan of the Baltic “extinctions”, forever shaking before the imaginary aggression of the RF Armed Forces. It’s not that this plan helped these countries in any way in the event of a real start of war - with the pace of deployment by NATO members of their “quick response” formations (with periods of 5-8 days or a month), Estonia’s aggression can be reflected. Nevertheless, the Turks blocked him.
The Turks, in addition, did not forget to plant another pig to their dearest sworn allied alliance and to the neighbor on Raven Sloboda - the Greeks. Ankara has concluded an agreement on the division of exclusive economic zones with the "government of national accord" in Tripoli, in Libya. With the one that controls almost nothing but Tripoli, and which they support, while the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and France come out against them on the side of Marshal Haftar, and there is Russian support, although it is officially (traditionally) denied, but enough facts. They concluded it over the head of the other neighbors involved and cut off their Greek EEZ agreed with the Libyans from Cyprus. Yes, and drew themselves a piece of the EEZ of Cyprus itself. Dissatisfied with this is not only the Greeks, who are already raising buchu in Europe (and probably will raise at the summit of the alliance), but also Cyprus and Egypt. In general, the fun is just beginning.
In addition, they try to squeeze Turkey on the Kurdish issue, which is extremely annoying. In general, unity in the alliance is not worse than in a communal apartment. Yes, the Americans may sell some of the solutions they need, but their implementation will probably be sabotaged further by all means.
Voice from under the heel of the boot
Germany, being occupied, in fact, by the state, and with considerable economic power - a political and military dwarf with disabilities, and then, in general, tired of overseas older brothers, but does not dare to open revolt. Moreover, the Americans are still holding control over Berlin through obedient elites of the country like old Merkel and her people who are ready to drop their ax on their feet, if only it would be nice in the USA. But also not in everything - the story with the Nord Stream 2 clearly shows this. No matter how raging in Washington, Berlin does not and will not make concessions on this issue.
It is curious that the latest polls in Germany have shown that only 22% of Germans want to continue the American nuclear shield over themselves, while 40% are inclined to European nuclear deterrence, at the EU level. And there are 7% of those who favor the acquisition of Germany by their nuclear weapons. But this, of course, is fantastic. It’s not that the Germans couldn’t develop nuclear devices, but Germany doesn’t even have the money for conventional forces, which are in full collapse at the moment. And neither the burghers nor the visiting bearded guys, who do not want to work, want to tighten their belts. Yes, and no one will let the Germans acquire their nuclear weapons.
The Germans (51%) consider France (!) To be their main ally, while the United States called only 19% such, and China and Russia named 7 and 4. At the same time, 66% of Germans assess relations with the United States as "bad." More than 60% of Germans want to strengthen relations with the Russian Federation and China, and only 50% - with the USA. More interested persons than with the "eastern bloc of the Russian Federation - China", only with the French - 77%.
The hopes of the young men
True, the Germans' hopes for a European nuclear shield are rather ephemeral. Britain leaves the EU and will not “contain” anyone, and her missiles do not belong to her - belong to the charges and boats, but not the Trident-2, they are leased from the USA. Does the US really need this European deterrence without them? Not. And France, with its 4 submarine missile carriers and Rafal fighters with ASMP-A and 300 missiles with nuclear charges, is hardly suitable for the role of the EU nuclear defender. At the same time, Macron, the “pusher” of the idea of European deterrence, the creation of European forces and other phantoms, has quite paradoxical dreams in his head. It seems to be close relations with Russia in exchange for its refusal from an alliance with China. That is why Russia needs it? The experience of our allied relations shows that there is nothing good from the friendship of a healthy Russian bear and a French rooster for a bear. On the other hand, our president V.V. Putin has already suggested that the Europeans “ensure security,” as if in jest. But even if it ever comes to that, it’s certainly not in exchange for China.
Nevertheless, the growth of centrifugal tendencies in NATO is obvious, and the result may be the withdrawal of some members from the military or political part of the alliance, as well as the creation of a certain neo-NATO from those countries with a radical attitude towards Russia who want to Washington threw them under the tracks of Russian tanks and under the blows of the Iskander and Dagger. Of course, not now, but in the future. And if so gain weight (gaining new useless countries), then at this age a variety of deadly diseases are inevitable. Yet 70 years - a solid age, not everyone survives. It’s time to know the honor ...
- Ya. Vyatkin, especially for "Military Review"
- twitter.com/jensstoltenberg
Information