Besides Celebrating NATO’s 75th Anniversary, much more is going on behind the scenes, and the true agenda is NOT for public consumption. Already telltale signs are coming out in bits and pieces, as what is likely to be what is actually transpiring, and it is not good. The recent summit only confirmed what some of us already knew, and it is worse than expected, the summit was nothing other a display of weakness and desperation.
If the seriousness of the event is to be judged by key moments, ailing president Joe Biden set the stage by having introduced Volodymy Zelensky as “President Putin” in YET “another embarrassing Gaffe” during a signing ceremony on the final day of the recent NATO summit in Washington DC.
Joe Biden made it crystal clear during what had been a highly -anticipated press conference, saying he is the most qualified person to run for United States president, and upgrading Zelensky’s status to that “President Putin” and describing his rival Donald Trump as his “vice-president”.
In a continuation of his true-to-form in recent public appearances, Biden only confirms the obvious, and the NATO congregation came across all the more convinced that he is not running the show—the 81year-old is not the decision-maker for America’s key role in NATO. But then who is in control, and what does this have to do with the timing, venue and agency of the recent summit?
What really is the agenda?
Besides the official agenda, or what we are being told is the birthday of the most successful alliance in history, already news is coming out that a new U.S. air force base in northern Poland, with the purpose of detecting and intercepting ballistic missile attacks as part of a broader NATO missile shield, is mission ready, as was announced by Jens Stoltenberg, NATO’s bureaucratic leader. .
The presidents of the US and leaders of NATO can come and go, but the program remains the same, This goes back to the cancellation of the INF treaty, during the Trump administration, and this decision may have more serious implications than we ever could have imagined. It is as if the purpose of cancelling a successfullyworking treaty that was a win-win for all parties, at least those in the NATO camp, and this brings us to where we are now.
This is the question we should be asking, and not only in retrospect but for the future, has NATO expansion made anyone safer? This is especially true when it comes to the adding of new countries and potential new members, with NATO effectively being camped out on Russia’s borders. Washington has not given up the quest of drawing Ukraine and Georgia into the less-than-unified or secure alliance—one that is splitting in the seams because of internal rifts and funding shortfalls.
Even Ukraine understands this as it makes separate security pacts with countries as Luxembourg and Poland, a few diverse ones in point. This is nothing new, with the recent signing with Prime Minister Luc Frieden of Luxembourg whereby a bilateral agreement on security cooperation and long-term support in was signed in Washington, DC.
The language of such agreements is basically the same, political, military, and economic cooperation, greater support for Ukraine’s future membership in the EU and NATO. This marks the twenty-second security agreement Ukraine has signed with its partners, prior to the most recent agreement with Poland and Luxembourg. It is as if Ukraine itself sees the inherent problems with NATO as a potentially unreliable partner, especially if Donald Trump gets back into the Whitehouse and makes good on his threats to settle matters once and for all between Ukraine and Russia.
As if we did not know!
As Stephen F. Cohen, now deceased, wrote back in 2018, as he saw everything heading to what is happening now, if whether an “enlarged” NATO has actually resulted in more insecurity and recalls NATOs track record in Serbia, the Iraq War, Afghanistan, and all the promises made that Georgia one day would be a member, and highlights the result was the “near ruination of Georgia in 2008”.
What is most revealing, and needs closer scrutiny is the political and ideological insecurities that NATO has bred, both within individual countries, Poland for instance, and between countries, as we are now seeing with Hungary and its stance on the Ukraine-Russia conflict and how best to proceed to finding a real solution to the bloodshed– rather than throwing more money, weapons and human lives away in an ever-increasing cycle of violence and escalation.
Value Added or More PR?
Another question is how much, if anything, new members such as Finland and Sweden have actually added to NATO’s collective strength, neither country has a particularly capable or numerous military, nor are they trained and equipped to operate with NATO forces, the only benefit is really the availability of additional bases which could be used by NATO forces, particularly the US.
The flip side of this is Finland’s long and porous border with Russia, which will likely prove extremely hard to defend in the case of a hot war between NATO and Russia. The supposed “strategic defeat” that Russia has “suffered” may well turn into a poisoned chalice for NATO and its new members, by weakening the alliance rather than strengthening it.
It is interesting to note that NATO has “indefinitely postponed” regular exercises with Georgia, called “Noble Partner” as a punishment for the recent passing of the Law on Transparency of Foreign Funding. Given the rhetoric from western diplomats, that the Georgian people should “make the right decision” on October 26th (isn’t that election interference?) and the fact that NATO did not even mention the possibility of Georgian accession, the cancelling of exercises and not talking about Georgian memberships are calculated moves to try and cause instability in Georgia and influence the upcoming elections.
It is a relief to see that the Georgian public, contrary to western expectations, seem unfazed, or even relieved, at these developments. It appears that common sense is prevailing in Georgia, with the public waking up from two decades of western indoctrination to realize that good relations with Russia are vital to the country’s future.
Many were listening to Biden’s dangerous speech at the beginning of the NATO Summit, as his claims that NATO is the strongest it has ever been, which is highly debated, and the longer the conflict in Ukraine drags on the weaker it will get.
NATO Stronger than ever!
Well, if under his leadership, IF, NATO is “stronger” then ever, it would be interesting to see “weak”, with Biden’s constant gaffes, misidentifications, and the obvious infighting and backstabbing between member countries, particularly related to Hungary, and also the unlimited promised support for Ukraine, which falls far short of what is necessary to defend the current front line, let alone mount any form of counteroffensive.
Three Patriot batteries or some other now failed weapons system won’t make any real difference to the disastrous air defense situation on the battle on the ground, while the promised never-ending supply of weapons and equipment seems to be being drip fed in to, at best, try and hold the line.
Not exactly a great display of “strength”.
What is even worse is the panic that is setting in behind closed doors in the west, and sometimes publicly. NATO members, especially the Biden administration, the UK, and Germany, have invested so much in propping up Ukraine, and trying to damage Russia, that they are like gamblers betting the house in a desperate attempt to win at the end of a long losing streak.
It is becoming increasingly obvious that the much anticipated F-16s will be flown by so-called “volunteers” due to the ongoing failure of the training program to produce the necessary Ukrainian pilots in anything other than pathetic numbers, and that they will have to be based outside Ukraine if they wish to last more than a few days, and those bases will become legitimate targets under the rules of war.
The Russian government has also noted that NATO troops are already present, accusing them of operating advanced weapons systems such as the HIMARS and Patriot batteries, as well as other western supplied air defences. There is also evidence of their activities on the front line, in intercepted communications, as well as a large number of dead “volunteers”.
Putin himself has warned that a NATO Russia conflict is a possibility, and that it will be only one step away from World War 3. All this makes the west look like a runaway freight train heading for the brink.
Could we please be honest about who is actually running the US and making all the misguided decisions? It is especially insightful, if Biden and his speechwriters actually believe their own rhetoric, “Ukraine was a free country today it still a free, and the country and the war will end with Ukraine remaining a free and independent country.”
Honesty is the best policy and for the US and NATO members, it should start at home.
Seth Ferris, investigative journalist and political scientist, expert on Middle Eastern affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
