US և NATO. Production of a new Cold War? NATO

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is trying to find its return to “normalcy” after four years of drama under the skillful leadership of former US President Donald Trump.

This will prove to be a difficult task. NATO seems to have lost its mojo after Trump distorted his strategic vision and values, questioned his overall destiny, albeit rhetorically.

However, the arrival of transatlantologist Biden brings life and vitality to the pact, as the US President seeks to reassure European allies of the seriousness of his administration in rebuilding trust and restoring harmony.

This is not the first time the alliance has recovered since the internal crisis.

In fact, during the last few decades there was a terrible perception of this or that part of the NATO crisis. “Deep crisis”, “deepening crisis”, “fundamental crisis”, “general crisis”, “unprecedented crisis” – even “real crisis”.

But NATO has always recovered.

Even before the end of the Cold War, NATO had its share of disagreements over the Suez Crisis, the Vietnam War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and authoritarian regimes. During the Cold War, fear of the Soviet Union helped unite its members, despite their differences. The greater the perception of threat, the deeper the unity.

When the Eastern Bloc collapsed in 1989, the alliance created to keep the Soviets, the Germans, and the Americans in Western Europe lost its very existence. Disagreements within NATO persisted, extending to the East, to the Gulf, to various military deployments in the Middle East.

2001 NATO 11.09. 24 hours after the New York-Washington attacks, for the first time in its history, NATO referred to Article 5, the cornerstone of its collective defense. But waging asymmetric wars beyond its long-term goals, particularly in Afghanistan, has proved an ungrateful effort – a source of tension.

Over the past 30 years, NATO has managed to maintain its unity through a series of cosmetic-structural surgeries, restoring its viability. It even almost doubled its membership from 16 to 30 members.

The alliance has repeatedly overcome internal differences by adapting through compromises. He will do it again on June 14 in Brussels, hoping to improve his appearance and performance in a more competitive world. Biden’s popularity in Europe compared to Trump will definitely help.

NATO will again rely on the fact that its members are more unifying than divisive.

In my opinion, it first of all protects their common economic and financial interests. With a population of almost one billion, half of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP), NATO has resolutely been the military of the privileged club of Western capitalist democracies.

Today, the bloc faces two major strategic challenges: the rise of China and the resurgence of Russia, which pose cyber-spatial and geopolitical threats, including in the Global South, where Beijing and to some extent Moscow are expanding.

All the other issues that have been raised in society, such as climate change, human security և development և etc., are the clothes of windows. This is not because they are not strong, of course, they are very strong, but because they are more G7 than NATO materials.

But since Trump’s psychological break-up, some Europeans say they fear over their reliance on the United States for security, as they have for the past seven decades.

The junior members of NATO were particularly traumatized by the irregular behavior of the president, while the older members of the continent, such as France and Germany, were cautious in their reactions. They are using the American Disable to call for greater European security autonomy and a more equal partnership with the United States.

They also took a more subtle, less dramatic view of the challenges facing Russia’s China than the Biden administration has. They prefer to avoid Cold War rhetoric and emphasize Russia’s involvement in the confrontation with Beijing.

And they have a point.

Russia, as former President Barack Obama said, is today nothing more than a “regional power” whose belligerent actions are not an expression of strength but of weakness.

It is better to restrain Russia through political and economic involvement than to alienate it through strategic confrontation.

And while China is raising a whole new geopolitical puzzle, it is not the Soviet Union.

Despite its enormous economic power and strategic ambitions, it does not maintain an alternative vision for the world. And since joining the World Trade Organization in 2001, Beijing has integrated its economy into the Western-led global economic system, enjoying enormous unexpected blows from its trade with the West.

Europeans see China as an economic competitor or, at worst, a competitor; they are content with a diverse world. But Washington is looking at China through a different lens. It believes that China is determined to become an Asian hegemon; it insists on curbing its rise before it becomes a world power. America wants to remain the undisputed superpower of the world.

This means that the Biden administration will have to charm and persecute its divided but prosperous European partners in order to back down.

In fact, some of the pressure is already working, as Europeans are increasingly moving away from China, especially in the technology and investment sectors, and the UK has demonstratively deployed aircraft carriers in the South China Sea.

In practice, NATO will sooner than later try to adopt a new strategic assessment of its 2010 mission. As part of a strategic assessment, but an assessment that places more emphasis on political cohesion արգման coordination. The Europeans will demand greater equality, lobbying Washington to make things less one-sided, as it did under Trump, or when the Biden administration decided to leave Afghanistan until there was no real consultation until the last minute.

For its part, Washington will continue to insist, as it has done in recent decades, that Europe must pay for a bigger word in NATO, a greater commitment to their collective security. It can also depict Asian powers, Japan aponia, South Korea, under the pretext of “defending democracy” in East Asia.

Easy to say, hard to do? Even though

But the bigger challenge is in defining NATO’s new role ել mission, given the alliance of Washington’s insistence on using the alliance to do what is necessary to maintain America’s global dominance, which will inevitably lead to a new Cold War with China.

Biden wants to use the NATO meeting to rally the alliance behind the United States until the June 16 summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, knowing full well that China is watching closely.

In the future, the desire of Ukraine and Georgia to expand the alliance or extend its project of force will undoubtedly lead both Moscow and Beijing to bring them closer to each other, with a serious branch for world security.

Biden must be careful about what he wants. it can just happen.

Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button