by T.V and Alida Weber (6-15-00)
One lesson that everyone should have learned from World War but some obviously have not is that networks of alliances don't guarantee peace. Instead, any conflict can become a tripwire that drags one nation after another into an ever-expanding war.
During the breakup of the former Soviet Union, Russia willingly dissolved the Warsaw Pact with the understanding that the West would reciprocate by dissolving NATO. This would have made good sense both practically and morallyt. But instead the West seized the opportunity to expand NATO into the vacuum left by the Warsaw Pact.
Russia protested this breach of faith, fearing an attempt to encircle and cripple Russia militarily and economically. Until the last round of NATO expansion, which took effect about a week before the bombing of Yugoslavia, Russia's protests were mistakenly ignored by many in the West as paranoia. (1) But NATO's attack on Yugoslavia, its occupation of Kosovo, and its flouting of U.N. Resolution 1244, have shown that any further expansion of NATO is a very real threat to Russia's existence.
What does that mean? Unless the West comes to its senses, Russia will do whatever is necessary to prevent NATO from coming any closer to its borders, and sooner or later that means war.
This is a very dangerous game. Russia has tens of thousands of nuclear weapons and they are pointed at us.
You would think Western leaders would employ some common sense and back off.
But now we see Croatia joining the misnamed "Partnership for Peace" and riding the fast track into NATO. The only other time Croatia was an independent entity, during World war II under Nazi patronage, it was a bitter enemy of both Yugoslavia and Russia.
Last month, the new Croatian Premier, Ivica Racan, made a speech in Brussels in which he expressed his wish to be an active partner of NATO. Said Racan:
According to the Serbian publication 'Danas', Croatia won't be sending troops:
Small consolation to the beleaguered Serbs holding out in Kosovo.
Simple. Whenever a country gets ready to join NATO, it bankrupts itself paying top dollar for U.S. armaments, required to bring its forces up to NATO standards. Make no mistake; that money will never find its way into the pockets of U.S. voters. If anything, in the long run, ordinary U.S. taxpayers will subsidize these purchases. The profit will go to the merchants of death who wield political power behind the scenesand they owe loyalty to no one on earth but themselves.
Meanwhile the Foreign Ministers of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Albania, and Macedonia,have recently gotten together to invite themselves into NATO. ('Washington Post,' 5-20-00)
Why are these men so eager to drag their nations into even greater financial ruin, while risking of war? Not to mention selling their nations into a position of even greater subservience to the US and other NATO powers? For with NATO membership comes constant, close interaction with NATO military officers and covert agencies, an ideal sitution for recruiting local officers and politicians to work for the US, Germany, and so on, and against the interests of their own people.
Is someone manipulating these governments behind the scenes with bribery or threats? Or is this just appeasement: after the bombing of Yugoslavia, do they fear that failure to demonstrate enthusiasm for joining the New World Order will mean their countries get bombed?
Maybe joining NATO will, in fact, prevent NATO from bombing their countries but that won't keep them from becoming a battleground in a future war. NATO isn't the only entity with bombs.
The article, "Scaling NATO's Ramparts," by Helle Bering, ('Washington Times', "Opinion" 5/24/00) foolishly supported NATO expansion, even though the same article relayed Russian President Vladimir Putin's warning that "'the expansion of military alliances outside Russia's borders is a threat to Russian security." And Russia regards NATO-led combined military exercises in the Baltic Sea, which involve both NATO and non-NATO nations, as a direct threat ('Reuters', 6/6/00)
Joining NATO is no shortcut to national security and no guarantee of peace and safety. A nation -- any nation -- is better served by keeping its armed forces on its own territory, ready to defend its own borders, shores, and skies and by avoiding words and actions that may give unnecessary offense to other nations.
T.V. and Alida Weber (3) are antiwar activists in the U.S.
(2) Why is NATO in Yugoslavia? by Prof. Sean Gervasi at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/gervasi/why.htm