Leading article

Nato must rediscover its purpose, or it will end up losing a war

European countries seem to think of their defence alliance as a means of getting security on the cheap. That won't work any longer

6 September 2014

9:00 AM

6 September 2014

9:00 AM

This week’s Nato summit was originally intended to look back on lessons learned from Afghanistan and reflect on the notion that (as Barack Obama put it) a ‘decade of war is now ending’. How naively optimistic that seems now.

In the past week a second American journalist has been beheaded in Iraq and the Sunni insurgents who call themselves Islamic State say that a British hostage will be next. So far, their war has claimed more than 25,000 lives. Meanwhile Russia is intensifying its war with Ukraine in a conflict that has seen the loss of at least 2,000 lives.

The dignitaries who arrive in Cardiff for the summit will notice extra security because Britain’s official terror threat has been raised from ‘severe’ to ‘substantial,’ meaning that a planned attack is deemed imminent. This latest escalation is due to concerns about new Islamist camps in Kenya, not Iraq.

The vast majority of Nato members had planned (and budgeted) for a decade of peace. The alliance is still operating on assumptions agreed in 2010: that the Middle East was stable, that Iraq was healing and that the threat of a European ground war died in the last century. None of these assumptions holds now — yet for most Nato members the ability to think strategically, let alone decisively, seems to have vanished.


The last time Nato met in Britain, in July 1990, it was reborn. The Cold War had ended, but Nato would become a diplomatic force and a vehicle for various operations. But it soon had another purpose: Nato allowed European members to skimp on defence and rely on America for protection. The Pentagon now invests three times as much on defence as the rest of Nato’s member states put together. It has become less an alliance, more a military welfare state.

It is far from clear why the American taxpayer should pay to protect a rich continent that refuses to defend itself properly. The former US defence secretary Robert Gates warned in 2011 that Europe’s refusal to spend enough money on defence risked leaving the alliance with ‘a dim and dismal future’. This trend has long been clear in eastern Europe: five years ago the former Czech and Polish presidents Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa declared in a joint protest that ‘Nato today seems weaker than when we joined’. Without American commitment, they feared, who would keep Russia at bay? Their fears have proved well founded.

Nato is still theoretically bound by Article 5 of the Treaty of Washington, which promises that an attack on one member will be regarded as an attack on all. But would Nato really have the infrastructure to repel a Putin adventure in the Baltic states like that which he has already undertaken in Ukraine? There has been nothing that even nearly replicates the forces which were stationed in West Germany during the Cold War. No new bases were built and no extra troops were deployed. Turkey is already losing faith in the alliance, as it demonstrated when it purchased a $3 billion Chinese anti-missile defence system that could not be integrated with Nato air defence systems.

Ever since the end of the Cold War, western military strategy has been to disregard Russia as a potential threat. Russia is a democracy, ran the thinking, therefore it would not menace other democracies. The same blind faith that countries cease to be a threat the moment they become democracies has coloured western military intervention in the Middle East. For 20 years policy has revolved around the idea that all we need to do is to overthrow dictatorships and instigate elections and thereafter, barring a little clearing up, once-threatening countries will become peaceful ones. It is a faith which has been utterly shattered in Afghanistan, in Libya and even more spectacularly in Iraq. Such is the march of Islamic fundamentalism that if you remove a dictatorship in the Arab world and you don’t end up with a western-style liberal democracy, you end up with a snake pit of competing religious factions, the most malign of which tends to dominate.

David Cameron failed to grasp this point a year ago when he proposed to intervene on behalf of the rebels fighting the Assad regime but was frustrated by a parliamentary vote. His critics have been proved right: how would it have helped Britain to have encouraged Isis? His reluctance to support Obama in air strikes on Isis’s Iraqi flank is difficult to understand. Unlike Assad, Isis is a direct threat to Britain, sucking in British wannabe jihadists, training them up in a moral vacuum of murderous ideology and then sending them back to wage terror here. It is unfortunate to have to choose between a ruthless suit-wearing dictator and bands of vicious religious zealots. But David Cameron — and all Nato leaders — could make their foreign policy decisions a little easier by always favouring the action that reduces the threat to western territories.

Robin Cook used to like to describe his foreign policy as ‘enlightened self-interest’. It is a doctrine which has continued to dominate, but if the past 15 years have taught us anything it is that defence policy could do with a little less enlightenment and a little more self-interest. This week’s summit provides another clear opportunity to redefine Nato’s purpose.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • foto2021

    The Ukraine problem has nothing to do with Nato weakness and everything to do with the actions of the EU and US destabilising the country.

    The Russian land grab in Crime and incursion into much of eastern Ukraine is a direct result of the EU and US supporting the armed thugs of Maidan Square who deposed a President and government that were democratically elected, replacing them with an unelected cabal of hoodlums, neo-Nazis and vitriolic anti-Russian nationalists. One of the first actions of this unelected mob was to withdraw official recognition of the Russian language, immediately alienating around a third of Ukraine’s population.

    Now the EU, US and Nato blame Putin’s Russia for the civil war that inevitably ensued. But the blame lies almost entirely with the west. The EU and US failed to recognise that most of Ukraine’s industry and wealth creation is centred in the Russian-speaking east, and that Ukraine’s economy is very closely linked to Russia’s. Most of Ukraine’s exports go to Russia and Russia supplies most of Ukraine’s energy in the form of gas.

    Formerly, the gas was supplied at a very low price to a close ally. Understandably, Russia is not keen to continue heavily subsidising the price of gas to a country whose unelected government is overtly hostile to its large Russian-speaking minority and which wishes to cut historic ties with Russia in favour of signing a deal with the EU.

    In all this, Nato is irrelevant. This is a purely political problem that was fomented by the politicians of the EU and US with a callous disregard for the consequences.

    • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

      Russian troll alert.
      Never admitting responsibility and always blaming “The west” in a deceitful manner will not magically fix the domestic woes and the moral vaccum of Russia in 2014.
      Just wait until China becomes resource hungry and looses respect for Russias wimpy little dictatorship.
      Try making some “incursions” to protect “pro-russians” in China…If or when it happens no one worldwide will have the stomack to immediately rush to Russia states aid then…

      • Pete Smith

        Yes, just call anyone with a different opinion to yours a “troll” it’s so much easier than reasoned debate.

        foto2021’s comments echo my own almost exactly, does that make me a “Russian troll” too?

      • rtj1211

        I don’t think that relations between Russia and China have anything to do with the issues currently pertaining in Ukraine.

        Trry answering the following questions:
        1. Were Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk elected by democratic mandate or installed after an illegitimate coup?
        2. Has the killing in Eastern Ukraine been instigated by Poroshenko et al or Putin?
        3. Who funded Poroshenko’s armed conflict (since it wasn’t the Ukrainian economy, which is a basket case)? The EU./US axis or Moscow?
        4. Who stands to gain from Ukraine going bankrupt under Yatsenyuk? Moscow or Western Corporations?
        5. Please provide the documentary evidence which shows that the Crimean referendum to rejoin Russia was entirely fixed, corrupt and unrepresentative? If you cannot, how is Poland joining the EU legitimate but Crimea rejoining Russia illegitimate??
        6. Why do you believe China will invade Russia other than that is what the Americans always do when they need some new resources?

        • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

          1. “illegitimate coup” are words that only a bitter Putin and his crony Yanukovich would normally opt for.
          The Maidan happened, the cameras were rolling and the decadence of the “illegal regime” exposed.http://yanukovychleaks.org/en/.
          Surely at least a fraction of what drove and drives Ukrainians today is precisely that.
          Poroshenko – Presidential elections were held in Ukraine on 25 May 2014

          26 August 2014 – “Ukraine President calls snap elections”
          Mandate to answer your question will go to the party that wins the forthcoming elections.
          2. The instability(including killings) was instigated by Putin’s reluctance to let Ukraine be a sovereign country. “Historic ties with Ukraine” to Putin simply means installing a crony in Kiev very similar to how all other Eastern European countries were being managed and suppressed prior to 1990. ( I did live in one of those countries before going to “The west”… I should know first hand)
          3.”Who funded Poroshenko’s armed conflict (since it wasn’t the Ukrainian economy, which is a basket case)? The EU./US axis or Moscow?”
          I don’t know much about the “EU./US axis”.
          Based on the latest Nato conference however the EU/US coalition is well on their way to let Putin have some more chunks of Ukraine.
          4. No one.

          5. “Please provide the documentary evidence which shows that the Crimean referendum to rejoin Russia was entirely fixed, corrupt and unrepresentative?”

          You must forgive me for assuming you are Russian, of course. If you have ever bothered talking to a real Ukraine citizens let alone Polish on the issue(many of whom deeply resent Russia/Russians) you would understand.
          6. Why do you believe China will invade Russia other than that is what the Americans always do when they need some new resources?

          Definitely off topic. First you would find the number of recent territorial claims by China steadily increasing. The open manner in which China trumpets its new found power is steadily becoming more blunt.The reason is the “Nouveau riche” situation that is growing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict
          China’s population of course is highly dense and has an increasingly demanding economy.On the other hand Natural resource rich country on the border that is way less populated and much weaker in 2014 … its only a matter of time before the grass starts looking greener in Russia to large groups of the Chinese elite.
          Couple that with Putins confused compass as to who poses true muscle-power match for Russia and it can only go one way.
          No doubt a speculative and significantly off topic. Only time will tell.

          • tolpuddle1

            You’re confusing Putin with Brezhnev.

          • surprise101

            it is a illegitimate coup and the chicken sh.T is about to splatter . nato is weak as F. you have no idea how many different countries are involved and want nato finished. nato has 28 weak countries with America and Israel. RussiA has the heavy artillery. ChinA RussiA,Latin American countries,VietnaM,IraN,NortH KoreA,IndiA,LebanoN. go type military and paramilitary personel’ do a comparison between reserves and direct military as well paramilitary. now look at IndiA china and OH MY LORD! VIETNAM. just look at VIETNAMS reserve HOLY F! YES! America and nato is definitely DONE or I mean WELL DONE!

      • Cyril Sneer

        The Russian troll accusation is just pathetic and quite frankly baseless, only that the OP’s opinion differs from yours, that is all.

        So, you must be Ukrainian right, hence your baseless accusations.

        • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

          I am half Ukrainian if we were to go that road. Another half Bulgarian. Seeing through my initial judgement error, I apologise for “baselessly” accusing those Op’s of being “trolls”.
          To wrap it up in regards to trolling I assure you there are people out there that do troll and are paid for it well. Disinformation is one of the things Putin feels happy with himself about. Before someone calls this Baseless have some RT TV channel to suppliment Bbc,Cnn etc.

          • saffrin

            “Disinformation is one of the things Putin feels happy with”

            Putin must be laughing his cock-off then as the amount of disinformation flooding through the western media is the biggest load of bull since they tried to sell us the Libyan ‘popular revolt’

      • Baron

        Nikita, read your rant again, nothing of any substance there, just labelling foto2021 who’s furnished one fact after another, that’s what wins arguments.

        By their own admissions, the US spent $5bn, the EU over 400mn euros in Ukraine. What on? We’ll never know for the EU accounts have never been edited, the Nuland’s bunch will not say.

        Before the February putsch, in which the EU, US State department were involved up their eyeball, the country’s ethnic tribes lived in peace with one another, enjoyed freedoms denied to them under the communist thugs, voted regularly. Look at the mess today, it’s not even a basket case, and for what?

      • tolpuddle1

        The West is stuck in an even worse moral vacuum than Russia, nor is the West short of domestic woes.

        And has it not occurred to you that China may attack Western allies (e.g. Taiwan, Japan, Singapore) which would be militarily easier (and non-nuclear) targets than Russia ? Or that a resurgent China – assuming it doesn’t collapse politically or economically (a big If) – might attack the West ?

        • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

          Being half Ukrainian and living in another Eastern European(not Ukraine) country prior to my UK residence , there is no way to refrain my vision of Russia of 2014 and specifically Putin. Its one thing to read and another to experience Kremlin’s tactics of undermining first hand.

          I do however very much doubt that I was right in my accusations of “Russian trolls” posting these comments.

          China is even more off topic than my original post. Anything is possible.

      • saffrin

        Russian troll alert?
        Is is well published the USA’s confession to spending over $6 billion subverting the Ukrainian people and the EU’s efforts to buy the legitimate Ukranian President are also well known.
        One only need listen to the retorike of both sides to know who the good guys are and I can assure you, it ain’t Obama or any of those EU muppets, including our own.

      • surprise101

        ChinA and RussiA are BRICS! america has multiple giant problems. the American country will collapse.america is overwhelmed with enemies from everywhere

  • thomasaikenhead

    “It is far from clear why the American taxpayer should pay to protect a rich continent that refuses to defend itself properly.”

    The biggest threat Europe faces with regard to its values and society is posed by mass immigration, not external military threats.

    It is the migrants gathered at Calais, the two million or so illegal immigrants already in the Uk, those crossing the Mediterranean in boats bound for Malta and Italy, the Third World illegal migrants moving from Turkey into Greece.

    Yes, the Russians are involved in Ukraine and Crimea to protect their strategic interests but, face the facts, NATO cannot get involved let alone fight a war, so diplomacy is the only solution.

    A war involving NATO and Russia would cause Russian energy exports to Europe to stop immediately and Germany would collapse virtually overnight.

    The last NATO venture involving military action was as ISAF in Afghanistan and that was a total and unmitigated disaster that saw a vast amount of blood and treasure spent and all in vain.

    The NATO involvement in the overthrow of Gadhaffi in Libya was another yet another disaster that served only to create a failed state across the Mediterranean and led to mass illegal immigration with Europe as the target!

    Little wonder that Europeans countries do not want to commit more men, material and money to NATO operations?

    • NotYouNotSure

      Agree with this, at best NATO is just more taxpayer money down the drain, at worst its the enforcement arm that has led to ever greater demographic decline in the West.

  • Diggery Whiggery

    It’s purpose is quite simple to define it is (or should be) one of mutual defence of it’s members. Ukraine ain’t one so for the moment there is no war to fight and so no war to lose.

  • timepass

    Shadow boxing, Spectator?!!

  • Pete Smith

    NATO coupled with EU expansionism is the biggest threat to world peace there is.

    NATO’s philosophy is to keep Russia from prospering economically and buy off it’s neighbours in order to surround them with NATO missiles on their back door. Modern Russia is more interested in trade than war but constant provocations by NATO could well change that.

    Meanwhile the whole middle East has become unstable, a consequence of US-NATO led foreign policy but the MSM will continue to be dominated by stories about “evil Putin and his little green men”.

    • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

      Another easy to spot Russian troll, I believe.

      • Pete Smith

        Yes, I bet you believe in father christmas, the tooth fairy and the easter bunny too.

      • rtj1211

        YOu might do better to provide the rigorous evidence contradicting Mr Smith’s statements, rather than resorting to puerile insults. You aren’t winning any arguments this way, you know….

      • Cyril Sneer

        You’re an 8 comment Kiev paid stooge, hence the baseless accusations.

        You have as much credibility as your masters in Kiev and Washington.

        • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

          I did apologise for the earlier “troll” comments to the Ops.

          Now its you on baseless accusation.

  • Carter Lee

    The UK for some incomprehensible reason has allowed the homogeneity of its island to be destroyed by mass immigration. The logic behind this policy is difficult to
    comprehend.

    Today the UK is paying a price for the destruction of its culture but in the future it will only get worse, far worse. This issue to this American is far graver for Britain’s future than whether the Donbas is governed by Moscow or Kiev or the Scot’s rule themselves.

    • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

      Could your comment be off topic, do you think??

      • Pete Smith

        At least his comment contained a topic and didn’t just scream “troll” at everyone who doesn’t agree with your world view .

        • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

          There are a significant number of articles that deal with UK immigration.
          Lower down and you can see a comment I made that relates to this article.

          • Pete Smith

            Which one? The one calling me a “Russian troll” or the one calling someone else a “Russian troll” while ignoring his points and going on to talk about China?

          • brotherbaldrick

            Lol

          • NotYouNotSure

            I find it utterly disgusting that people with names like “Redko” come into this country and then demand the correct thoughts that natives of the land should have and calls them trolls.

            Redko, go back to where you came from, you don’t belong here.

      • tolpuddle1

        No, very much on-topic. Mass immigration and economic globalisation have destroyed the West’s identity and hope – and thus the West’s will (let alone capacity) to wage war.

      • NotYouNotSure

        Not off topic, people are screaming about civil wars in Iraq or Ukraine as the existential threats to West, when they are clearly not.

        And frankly I fail to see why some Eastern European should have the audacity to decide what the threat to Britain is, you want others to fight in your stupid national wars in Eastern Europe they are meaningless distractions.

        • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

          It is understandable why many people surely agree with you.
          History teaches lessons , WWI and WWII just like David Cameron( criticise him all you like )said. What Hitler got away with once rolling was much harder for the allies to stop and practicly unstoppable for Hitler himself to give up once started. That is why many Eastern europeans remind you that you can’t just shut the door close now with a nothing to do with me attitude. I mean of course you can do just that. Its another question for how long such an approach will be effective.

          Hope I am wrong, having spent no less the a decade living in the UK. I live by the UK and only then EU law, pay my taxes and hope that the UK government gets its NATO policy right!

  • rtj1211

    It might behove NATO to ask whether the geographical drivers of war, which predicated the formation of NATO still exist or whether a body of different geographical nature might be more useful nowadays.

    The Cold War ended 20 years ago, just as the CIA and MI6 decided that inflaming Arabs was a good idea (one of their more enlightened judgements, it has to be said). Russia has been to war once in those 24 years, against an immediate neighbour. It was a limited war of short duration, unlike the endless ones the West has engaged in in Afghanistan, Iraq and more recently in Libya, with Syria on the agenda and Ukraine salivating the warmongers’ instincts currently.

    I would like to see a pan-Arab defence organisation to police their own region of the Middle East, funded from all the all riches they have acquired the past 50 years.

    I would like to see a pan-African defence organisation to police outbreaks of disorder on that continent, as has happened many times the past 25 years. The mineral wealth of many African nations can help to fund it.

    Personally, I would like to see a joint EU-Russian defence organisation to maintain the integrity of states around the EU-Russian borders. It might help the Poles to get on better with the Russians, the Ukrainians never to be enslaved by the Germans and the Lithuanians to discover that most Russians living in Pskov don’t want to invade Vilnius any time soon.

    Quite what the Americans should get up to is anyone’s guess. They had war in the Middle East and with Russia on the agenda up to 2030 and then war with China. I wish they would just re-fight their own civil war and kill all their bloodthirsty geostrategic madmen that way. They want to leave Europe as an economic wasteland and they feel most threatened by the natives of South America standing up to them and saying they wish to go their own way.

    I think it is clear from what I am saying that the greatest world imperative right now is to redefine the USA”s role in the world, not as a hyperpower without challenger, but as a nation which has finally grown up.

    Perhaps it will happen just as I am about to die??

    It won’t happen before 2025, that’s for sure. Still believe in economic ransacking as a right, you read American bloggers saying so every day of the week.

    • timepass

      Maybe the West Europeans will realize one day that the real threat to them is not Russia, it never has had imperial ambitions like the US hegemon. Any conflicts have been restricted to their immediate neighborhoods and mostly borders, which they treat as a buffer for self protection – since at least the time of Napoleon’s invasion.

      So far the Americans have only succeeded in bringing Europe to the brink of war with provocations like Ukraine, the next one might be real. And it will be in Europe’s backyard, not in North America, that the war will be fought and millions of Europeans will get killed.

      • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

        I think you hit it on the nail here.
        “treat as a buffer for self protection” that is what drives Ukrainians today.
        Russia’s failure to recognize that” buffet zone times ” are over when it comes to Ukraine, Poland, Baltic’s etc. Putin being from the pre Russian state times is simply stuck in a grossly outdated world view.

    • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

      Had to re read your post that is now 2 days old.
      Ceasefire and permanent peace talks underwa in Ukrainey fingers crossed tsignals the end to the bloodshed.
      Going forward in my view if Russia wants to have buffer zones it can have them all she wants inside Russia. Russia wanting “Ukraine as a buffer zone” on the other hand is similar to Ukraine putting forward territorial claimsaiming towards today’s Russian territory.
      The model where the US,Soviet/Russia fight in another country to avoid direct conflict has got to stop . Then can battle it out by 2035 either in Alaska or in some other madmans way.
      That on the side I find that your vision has a lot of legs and the potent questions it raises are worth pursuing compared to the things that only bring cold war memories….NATO, WEST vs EAST divisions …these just don’t seem to be firmly placed in a planet where vast new countries already hold significant power.

      Some food for thought in your comment, that’s for sure.

  • brotherbaldrick

    So someone with absolutely no military knowledge is pontificating in the Spectator about “what NATO must do”, the little girly or laddie who wrote this piece can’t even tell the difference between an SPG and an MBT! As for NATO, its time it was disbanded, it’s become nothing more than a tool of the EU and it was the EU’s botched attempt at even more expansion that caused this mess in the first place! EU and NATO chimps: keep your fkng noses out of Eastern Euorpe!

  • Baron

    NATO was set-up as a counterweight to the Warsaw Pact alliance. The latter folded up two decades ago, the time is to dismantle NATO, too, work on a joint European collaborative set-up including Russia for the threat to us will come both from the south and further east than Russia.

  • Roger Hudson

    We need to think about ‘threat’. The USSR was a threat to our way of life, it wanted to expand command ‘socialism’ to all of western Europe and beyond ( it wasn’t true socialism, that is a theoretical illusion) but Russia is today like the old Russia of Catherine or Ivan, it is no threat to us. The Russians you see all over London or the Med. want to embrace our way of life, not destroy it like Stalin.
    There are Russians all over Eastern Europe and the locals dislike them for what the Soviet USSR did 1940-90. The EU must work on the Baltic states who treat ethnic Russians badly, they were let in on a false prospectus, just like others must be stopped from mistreating their Roma.

  • dalai guevara

    Europe will discover that following a reduced input from the US on the world stage due to entirely predicted budget constraint and lack of radical leadership and common outlook, a new outlook will be required to pursue one’s own interests. Whether that requires a pooling and joining up of European military forces is no longer a question – it merely follows the same principles of budget constraints and common outlook (as Russia proves).

  • saffrin

    Nato was supposed to be a defence pact not the lying invader it has become today.
    Obama, Nobel Peace Prize winner, you are a warmonger.

  • Roger Hudson

    Western ‘leaders’ are very quiet these days about ‘the responsibility to protect’. A doctrine dreamed up in the late 90s to give cover, in the absence of UN authority, for the bombing of Serbia and the invasion of Serbian Kosovo. Remember? when Blair got the SAS to train the KLA, who made their money by smuggling drugs and slaves into Europe to fund their civil war.
    Putin could claim the ‘responsibility to protect’ could legitimize his support for the Russian speaking minority in Ukraine. Or does it only work one way?

    • Nikita K. Tsarov-Redko

      The moral high ground while sitting very firmly with the US/EU at the upper mentioned period of history starting to slip away when Clinton decided to opt in as the world’s Policeman. The really Pandoras box was opened with Iraq and words with dubious International law standing like “Intervention”. That just proved to be a disaster rhetoric design to sell at home what the UK,EU, USA governments and much less the people wanted to do. I bet some of these leaders were plain itching to have their name front page more and some to get glory among those nations best in history. Not much different than what Putin is simply copycat doing now.
      There is however one significant degrading element when it comes to the situation in Ukraine.
      If Bosnia, then Iraq/Afghanistan paved the way for the wets moral high ground to be surrendered which allowed Russia to do what its doing to Ukraine today then letting Ukraine go to pieces now surrenders the idea of reversing another nuclear arms race. Ukraine’s dismemberment as Russia demands it is the concrete that will solidify any none nuclear states ambitions to achieve their goals through the means of terror and threat of aggression. World’s thirdlargest nuclear weapons arsenal voluntarily surreundered against worthless territorial integrity guarantees and look at the value these promises hold…
      Iran, N. Korea and likely others have just landed their strongest “evidence” that its nuclear or “nothing” today.

      Sounds horrible

  • NotYouNotSure

    This article asks what the purpose of NATO is, but it does provide any straight answers. To argue that a bunch of bandits in Iraq pose a threat to Britain or that Putin is about to invade Estonia is not an argument for NATO, they are simply a joke.

  • Radford_NG

    The NATO defense line should not have been extended beyond a line stretching from Stettin on the Baltic to Trieste on the Adriatic;and encompassing Pilsen and Ceske Budejouivice.

  • Radford_NG

    An Independent U.K.ought to seek to establish a free-trade port at Konigsberg in Courland and Sevastopol in the Crimea:under the rubric of the Hanseatic League.

  • Radford_NG

    The situation in The Ukraine has been caused by the unprovoked aggression of unelected executive officers at the EU and NATO,along with neo-cons at the US State Department.

  • Zionist lackey

    With the ending of the Cold War, European politicians could not wait to get their hands on their respective nation’s defence budgets – only America, the UK, Estonia, Poland, and the Czech Republic are spending 2% of their GDP on defence as NATO has insisted should be the case.

    History suggests the next war is just around the corner: after the Cold War (as it does after all wars), complacency sets in among the victors. But, because of the EU and political and monetary union; European conflict (we were told) would this time really be brought to an end – and this ‘guaranteed’ peace has always been the selling point for political and monetary union.

    I fear our leaders are about to find out the hard way that their nation’s defences are of greater importance than their collective health services, or their welfare spending that scooped up most of the money from defence cuts. Politicians never learn until it is nearly too late – now I fear it is too late.

    NATO without US membership would be treated with derision. Yet the US has always been despised on the European continent as the great Satan of the Anglo-Saxon world (the Anglosphere). Now, as they did in the Second World War, the continent is relying once more on the US defence budget to protect the continent once more, and keep us all safe.

    The EU has tweaked the tiger’s tale, and the tiger is now roaring its reply. Putin has reacted to what is the EU’s own form of empire building. The Ukraine was seduced (although it needed very little seduction) into joining great Borg Collective know as the EU. Between 2007-2011 the EU gave the Ukraine £300 million in aid. A lucrative amount for such a small East European country, and a small price to pay for increasing the EU empire.

    Of course Putin is also engaged on the same ambition for mother Russia. But all we in the West have been given is a one-sided story of Russian empire building. But before the West carries this conflict any further, the people of the Europe need to understand that there is another side to the story – one which sadly the media chose not to focus upon.

  • surprise101

    it’s time for IndiA and VietnaM to have a meeting with RussiA.time for America and nato to LOSE!

  • surprise101

    IndiA and VietnaM has good relations.

Close