The conflict between globalists and nationalists in the imperialist camp is increasingly reflected in the North Atlantic Alliance. As a result, mutually exclusive statements are heard in NATO capitals and contradictory actions are taken, noted Deputy Chairman of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Dmitry Novikov, speaking in the “Meanwhile” program
Dmitry Novikov agreed that at this historical stage NATO can be assessed as a fairly successful and strong military bloc. That is why it is extremely dangerous and poses acute threats to the modern world. The sooner the alliance leaves the historical stage and loses the opportunity to celebrate its next anniversaries, the better it will be for everyone on this planet, noted the Deputy Chairman of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation.
According to Dmitry Georgievich, NATO is celebrating its 75th anniversary in the face of growing contradictions. The alliance has accepted many countries with different interests. In its states, either supporters of globalism or supporters of nationalism come to power. Their most acute dispute is taking place today within the United States – in the NATO stronghold. “This is a fundamental dispute. And the more nationalists win, the more they insist on the sovereign interests of their countries, the more the bloc will come apart at the seams,” the representative of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation emphasized.
The host of the program, Natalya Metlina, touched upon the issue of the upcoming change in NATO leadership. The most likely candidate for the post of secretary general of the organization is the head of the Dutch government, Mark Rutte. In this regard, the question was asked whether anything would change in the bloc’s policy after the change of figures.
Dmitry Novikov drew attention to the fact that the foreign ministers had gathered to prepare for the “big” NATO summit, which will be held in the summer. And one of the issues on his agenda concerns management personnel. However, for Russia, a possible change in the head of the alliance is not of great importance, because only someone who is in the NATO-wide context can become the head of the bloc: “Rutte is a conductor of the same ideas that were promoted in her time by Margaret Thatcher. He is an absolute supporter of neoliberalism. But his rival, Romanian President Klaus Iohannis, also takes a very tough position on Russian-Ukrainian issues. In any case, we cannot expect any kind of reversal in NATO policy with a change in the Secretary General,” Novikov said.
Against this background, the United States declassified the transcript of a conversation between NATO Secretary General Manfred Woerner and Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation Ruslan Khasbulatov in 1992. The then head of the alliance guaranteed that NATO would not interfere in the internal affairs of Russia and other CIS countries. Natalya Metlina asked her interlocutor’s opinion about why the transcript was made public right now.
As Dmitry Novikov noted, the dialogue between Werner and Khasbulatov refutes the assertions that the West did not promise anything to anyone and that this is supposedly not recorded anywhere: “It turns out that it has been recorded and is becoming the property of modern socio-political discourse. Here we are again faced with a conflict between nationalists and globalists. The first believe that there are enough problems within the United States and if they are not solved, this will create an explosive situation. Now they want to focus on their own affairs, without rejecting future hegemonic claims on the world stage. At this stage, they consider it necessary to abandon the most aggressive plans abroad. This is supported by a specific historical plot: it turns out that you don’t have to fight with Russia, because you can promise it something, to lull its vigilance.”
One of the statements at the latest NATO forum concerned the creation of a Ukraine Support Fund to finance military supplies to Kyiv. Dmitry Novikov expressed the opinion that achieving this goal will not be easy. There are disagreements within NATO, and a number of countries are ready to block the initiative. On the other hand, the United States does not want to bear the main burden, but wants to force the remaining members of the bloc to spend the notorious 2% of GDP on the activities of the alliance. Increasingly, this comes to the surface during discussions. The announced readiness to create a fund to support Ukraine is a step against the background of which Washington and its supporters will try to accustom everyone else to the idea of the need to contribute more funds.
For exactly the same reasons, a number of NATO members are afraid of Trump’s return to the White House. While in power, he very firmly insisted on the need to increase the financial investments of European countries in the NATO treasury.
Meanwhile, a number of political forces in Germany initiated a discussion around the NATO Charter regarding the application of Article 5, which provides for mutual defense in the event of a threat to one of the alliance members. This is happening against the backdrop of mass street protests by Germans against participation in Brussels’ adventures. Dmitry Novikov was asked the question: does this mean that Berlin will leave the bloc?
The guest in the studio noted that there is a tough internal political struggle in Germany and there is a mass mood to minimize participation in NATO: “The very fact of discussing the issue in the Bundestag means the presence of healthy forces in it. However, the political elite that is endowed with the right to make real decisions is closely connected withUSA and NATO. At the same time, Olaf Scholz is trying to balance. In relation to Russia, he makes either aggressive or softer statements. The fact that the procedure for considering Article 5 has begun in parliament confirms the existence of a heated all-German debate. This is good news for us, but we should not delude ourselves.”
To prove his theses, Dmitry Novikov cited an article by the heads of the Foreign Ministries of Germany, France and Poland, published on April 3 in Politico. It states that Article 5 of the NATO Charter is not subject to revision. A number of other statements were also made. For example, about the joint fight against “Russian imperialism”, about the inadmissibility of a policy of concessions towards Moscow, and also about the fact that all NATO countries must increase their military budgets to 2% of GDP.
Another joint statement appeared – this time from the foreign ministers of France and Great Britain – about the need to support Kyiv. Like, if Ukraine loses, we all lose, and Putin will have a free hand. So, the communist deputy concluded, at the top level the anti-Russian front is not becoming weaker, although mass sentiment in Europe is directly opposite.
Then we talked about the position of French President Emmanuel Macron, who is increasingly speculating on the Ukrainian topic. Dmitry Novikov suggested thinking about Macron’s position today. At the beginning of his presidential term, this politician tried to gain high authority in France and throughout Europe. For this reason, for example, he made loud statements about the “brain death of NATO” and proposed creating a pan-European army. But, the representative of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation emphasized, this time has passed. Macron’s powers are coming to an end, and he is looking for a new place in globalist organizations: “And he cannot do without the support of Washington. Therefore, today he is becoming not a pro-European, but a pro-American politician, and therefore, as anti-Russian as possible. Hence his statements that French soldiers may end up in Ukraine.”
Novikov assessed another topic of the latest NATO meeting as extremely symptomatic. It concerned the Asia-Pacific region. The leadership of the bloc openly calls for unity against the “alliance of authoritarian countries”: Russia, China, Iran and the DPRK. Dmitry Georgievich repeated his remark that the current NATO meeting was of a preparatory nature before the summit in Washington: “So, the agenda is now being prepared. And this plot becomes one of the main ones in NATO. The statement was made earlier that NATO is no longer quite a Euro-Atlantic bloc with local interests. Now they say that their area of interest is the whole world. Therefore, ties with Japan, South Korea, and Australia are strengthening.”
Behind attempts to expand NATO’s area of responsibility, Dmitry Novikov proposed to see also a manifestation of the weakness of the collective West. From a political point of view: “By calling Russia, China, North Korea and Iran a powerful force that threatens them all at the same time, NATO is admitting its economic and political vulnerability.”
Speaking at the end of the program about the future of the North Atlantic Alliance, the Deputy Chairman of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation drew attention to the fact that the disputes surrounding the increase in NATO spending concern not just the financial and military calculations of individual countries. For a number of European states, their disagreement on budget formation issues is also a way of expressing their political position.