NATO orphans

Thierry Meyssan ) 

The recent withdrawal of US troops from Syria is the fourth withdrawal ordered by President Trump.

Like previous orders, it was canceled on the ground from the Pentagon, this time on the pretext of not abandoning US allies against the Syrian Arab Republic or against ISIS.

To reassure them, the US president, for his part, claimed that he had agreed to re-seize the region’s oil.

However, photographs of military bases from which US forces withdrew and were replaced by Russian military police have had a shocking impact on all embassies of the world.

It is certain that in the very near future, if not today, the United States is no longer the leading military power in the world, and no longer essentially wants to be the “policeman of the world”.

The unipolar system  that has prevailed since the disintegration of the Soviet Union until recently, is already dead, and NATO allies have become orphans, thus each individual country tries to maintain its influence, to the point of trying to regain the place it occupied in the 19th century.

This is most apparent in Turkey, which has already grasped this issue before other NATO allies, when Erdogan announced in a speech on October 15, 2016 that he wanted to implement the “national section” of Ataturk, aimed at reoccupying northeastern Greece (Western Thrace and Dodecanese) , all of Cyprus, northern Syria, particularly Idlib, Aleppo, Hassakeh and northern Iraq, including Mosul. But it is less clear to the Europeans, who have been stuck in the pax Americana for seventy-four years, despite the escalation of old conflicts, from now on in more than one place.

The UK, wishing to become a global tax haven, will first have to break away from the EU, despite the concerns of its current partners.

They will then have to return to their old policies of previous centuries and try to harm any superpower in the old continent.

It has already begun to incite in Brussels against Moscow, and in Moscow against Brussels. Germany and France are also aware of the disproportionate size of their respective aspirations.

That is why President Mitterrand and Chancellor Helmut Kohl turned (the European Common Market) to the European Union.

Through the Maastricht Treaty (1991), they intended to realize Napoleon’s dream of creating a superpower capable of competing with the United States and China.

After that, this union became a coercive force under the Lisbon Treaty of 2007.

Brussels has since been able to condemn Bologna, or refuse to approve Italy’s budget, for example. The Germans plan to deploy their military in place of the United States in the greater Middle East, but under NATO protection.

They thought about it after President Obama announced his desire to move his forces to the Far East, which now forces them to rearm at a high pace using the US “cover” for some time.

The French, for their part, now only have to cut the placenta with the United States.

More than ever, they are determined to create a European army as soon as possible, while not giving up the idea of ​​integrating British armies into it.

But if we assume that all the soldiers of the EU member states are ready to die for their country, is there anyone ready to die for Brussels ?.

  • Source : ( voltairenet.org ) 

Leave a Reply

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

*