March 25, 2023

The unraveling of the Soviet Empire was widely perceived as a vindication of American verities and the beginning of an era of universal peace. Unfortunately, the preservation of the military alliance and its subsequent eastward expansion created an atmosphere of mistrust and trepidation.

‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609268089992-0’); }); }

Established in April 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization or NATO’s prime purpose was deterring Soviet expansionism. By 1989 with the Berlin Wall coming down, NATO accomplished its founders’ stated objective. “Mission accomplished,” however, was not good news for the military alliance — it needed to be dissolved, find new enemies, or find a new mission for self-preservation. NATO’s new mission is defined on its website:

NATO is an active and leading contributor to peace and security on the international stage (emphasis mine). It promotes democratic values and is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes.

Rarely has the implementation of a strategic document missed its stated objectives so profoundly as the NATO mission statement. In its quest to “promote democratic values,” NATO has forgone the ultimate democratic value – preservation of human life.    This “leading contributor to peace and security” became a façade for American ambition to reconstruct the world in conformity with its values.  To impose the American vision of moral governance, NATO launched its version of The Thirty Years‘ War across continents with the ruthless application of modern destructive weapons. The Balkans, Lebanon, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya will carry the scars of NATO’s wars for generations.

The most outrageous example of NATO’s “contribution to peace” is the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The US, to justify the invasion, fabricated evidence of Iraq developing a nuclear weapon and lied to the UN and the world about it. The United Nations Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, explicitly declared the invasion illegal. After wasting trillions of dollars and having thousands of Americans and other NATO nationals dead and wounded, those adventures ended in humiliating withdrawal leaving behind millions of victims, chaos, and mass distraction. Ironically it was called nation-building. Paradox is NATO’s most distinguishing feature. Constantly at war, it considers itself peaceful. Not to be deterred, barely exiting the shameful retreat from Afghanistan, it ignited war in Ukraine.

‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609270365559-0’); }); }

A prelude for this war began with the demise of the Soviet Union and the subsequent disintegration of the Warsaw Pact that completely altered the world balance of power. Russia’s executive power was in a state of paralysis, and its military was in despair. That was when NATO initiated major eastward expansion into contested territory toward the Russian borders, increasing its membership from 16 countries to 30 today. At that time, Russia posed a threat only to itself.

Even though today’s Russia, with a population of about 150 million, is a fraction of what used to be the mighty Soviet Union, NATO still protects Europe ostensibly from Russian expansionism.

Europe, on the other hand, has become a massive economic power with a population of 500 million and a GDP exceeding Russia’s by tenfold. If we add the United States to the equation, we will have a population of about 850 million with combined GDP exceeding the Russians’ by twenty-fold. Militarily, Russia is also no match to NATO, whose defense budget is around $1.2 trillion, versus the Russian military expenditure, which is just under $90 billion.

Moreover, before the war, Europe and Russia were partners in mutual prosperity. It was impossible to conceive rapid growth of the European economy without cheap Russian energy, while Russia’s dependence on Western technologies and energy euros could not be overstated. Indeed, the EU imposed economic suctions on Russia after the invasion because it believed that Russian dependence on Western technologies and services were critical for Russia’s economic survival.

Thus, given the mathematical logic, correlation of forces, and economic interdependence, any suggestion that Russia poses a threat to Europe is preposterous, if not cynical. On the contrary, Russia looks like easy prey. 

Russia’s geopolitical vulnerability fueled Russian leaders’ anxiety. During the last thirty years, Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Putin issued multiple warnings that NATO’s expansion destabilizes Europe and threatens Russian security. Finally, in December 2021, in a last-ditch effort, Putin demanded that NATO stop eastward expansion and committed to not admitting Ukraine to NATO. Still, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg arrogantly rejected any discussion of the subject. At that point, the last element of flexibility was lost, and Moscow reacted as expected to preempt a potential threat.