Ovi -
we cover every issue
Poverty - Homeless  
Ovi Bookshop - Free Ebook
worldwide creative inspiration
Ovi Language
Michael R. Czinkota: As I See It...
Stop violence against women
Murray Hunter: Opportunity, Strategy and Entrepreneurship
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
BBC News :   - 
iBite :   - 
Murder in Wales
by Thanos Kalamidas
2014-09-06 09:54:42
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author
DeliciousRedditFacebookDigg! StumbleUpon

The NATO summit in Wales shown a western united front in front of the challenges presented in Ukraine, with Putin’s aggression and in Iraq and Syria with the Islamic State’s barbarism and expansion. At least that was what attracted the press and the headlines. But the significant of the summit was behind the closed doors and had little to do with Russia and nothing with the IS.

NATO is an anachronistic institution that has no real reason of existence the last two decades and after the fall of the Berlin Wall. It’s only use has been the promotion of the US military industry, often entangling in UN and making everybody involved feel uncomfortable. NATO, even though kept in the cold for nearly two decades, returned after US pressure on the UN, under the umbrella of the UN, to complicate further peace causes like in Afghanistan’s case. But now to the important part, NATO has constantly served US strategic plans and geopolitics.

And it was Putin who gave to NATO the golden chance for a rebirth and the big return. But most importantly NATO, serving US strategic objectives, became the Trojan horse for Europe’s return to the post-WWII era and its dependency from USA. With Ukraine rekindling the cold war and the imposition of Merkelism in Europe, USA established a new era of its dominance in the western hemisphere and especially in Europe. And this time the dominance is absolute, with consequence the beginning of the end for the EU as we knew it.

But first to make something clear, there are absolutely no conspiracy theories here, purely observations on geopolitics and strategic aims. It is not the first time I’m doing reference to the long going competition between Europe and USA and the only reason that this competition has never escalated into an actual war – at least not yet, even though there was a critical moment during Bush senior’s administration, when Europe refused US demands on the sales and production of certain metals that US needs and imports from Europe – it is because of purely ethical reasons, based on the common cultural roots and past close alliances.

Finally and very basic; to be pro-European doesn’t make you anti-anything and in this case anti-American. The dream of every European is to see a united Europe in its traditional role, – at least the one that has evaluated for centuries – a continent of culture and art, the champion of human rights and settler for the aggrieved from all around the world. That also doesn’t mean that all Americans are happy with the existence of a United Europe, away from the American dominance. And the examples are pretty recent with leading the attitude of certain members of the George W. Bush’s administration like Donald Rumsfeld, who actually often saw Europe as an American protectorate obliged to follow orders.

Now saying that, to succeed a United Europe that would gradually evolute to the United States of Europe, it was necessary to apply common economy, united defence mechanisms and common foreign policy. That was in the foundations of the Union and the strategic aim the last forty years.

The common currency became a reality a decade ago establishing a new international reality. The economic dependency from the US dollar was nearly over and euro soon became a competitive currency in the international market, creating its own exchange reality and efficiency that expanded to most Africa and gradually to Asia all the way to China. Even the oil producer Arab counties, started partly replacing the US dollar with euros as their exchange and balance currency.

As it was natural the new situation alarmed a lot in USA and it changed economic and geopolitical plans. The dollar had been often used in the past as an element for indirect political pressure to European, dependant from the US currency, economies. European economies had often felt the pressure of the US dollar when national policies didn’t satisfy certain American administrations or interests. In early 1970s, the German mark was one of the first to feel the power and the strategies behind the US dollar and in front of a dramatic devaluation and a catastrophic recession the then German government was forced to change policies towards USSR and Willy Brandt to limit his Realpolitik to secondary issues.

Actually it was not only the pan-European dream that motivated the creation of the new currency but also the fear in front of the aggression of certain elements in the American administrations or American presidents. It was the necessity of an independent economy that would gradually lead into an independent growth for the best of the European people. That’s why from the beginning, euro had to deal with aggressiveness starting from certain economic centers all based in USA. That’s why from the beginning the euro found rate agencies fighting it and trying hard to bring it in the international exchange market to equal terms with the US dollar. But I will come back to this soon.

merkel_400_01The euro-crisis and the euro-recession was partly consequence of the international economic crisis but it was mainly a mistake, a lethal mistake of European policies and especially of the Mekrelism that started then rising. The major mistake that led in the deepening of the euro-crisis was the lack of political support to the new currency. Excited of the international support the new currency found, the European leadership of the euro-zone, turned into euro-imperialists to the point to enforce a sudden expansion with twelve new member states that hadn’t fulfilled the necessary criteria. As a consequence, EU expanded its population and consuming power but without having the necessary economic strength to support this expansion. Therefore instead of having twelve more members to expand and support the new currency, EU found itself under the weight of twelve new countries with serious economic problems and economies unprepared for the change. Actually most of them survived and do survive even now, thanks to loans from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). So when the crisis started from Greece – a euro-zone member - it actually worked as a domino swamping all of them and endangering the new currency.

The situation led Europe in a constant introvert and putting aside every other plan, the European leadership focused into the recovery of the national economies. Again, Merkelism rose focusing into a slow series of cuts in public sector spending, instead of acting fast and efficiently investing in growth like very correctly the US president Barack Obama did, facing exactly the same situation and an international debt that makes the collective European debt look like a joke.

Prioritizing economy and practicing Merkelism in combination with continuous introvert, issues like euro-defense and common foreign policy disappeared or better were put aside in non-existence condition.

But let’s move a bit to foreign policy. Traditionally Europe is the only unity in good relations with all sides in the Middle East. Leaders from all sides and ethnicities periodically found settler in Europe and that includes from Yasser Arafat to Khomeini. Europe could have played critical role in the solution of the Middle East, but the last few years Europe has lost credibility in the region. Especially after the events in Lebanon and the non-existence European interference, and that despite all the calls from both sides. The same happened in West Africa, in East Africa and South Africa, in South East Asia; where Europe could have prevented genocides and instead stood still watching unveiling catastrophes despite calls for help. Actually Europe could play major role even in the latest events in Ukraine if there was a certain strategy and not promises without program that gave the chance to Putin to apply his strategies and long term aims.

Even in the UN and the Security Council, the European Union was limited into watching and then deciding to follow the majority, a contradiction to the European countries independent reactions in the past and before the EU supposedly common foreign policy.  Actually the European united foreign policy has been limited the last few years into observing numb, events unveiling in front of her without reacting. And that because the European united foreign policy is limited to that role due to political decisions that prioritize the economic recovery from international relations.

The euro-defense is a huge chapter. Euro-defense doesn’t mean only an army constituted from soldiers from every EU member. Euro-defense means an institution equipped and organized by Europeans for the Europeans. It means a structure that will include a contemporary military mechanism supported from contemporary military infrastructure and a modern military industry that will cover from transportation vehicles to airspace. From software to hardware and from satellites to plain clothes and army boots. And of course hundreds thousands of jobs.  

A huge investment, that first of all had already the foundations in infrastructure; never forget the very efficient and competitive euro-fighter (the European answer to F16), the tornadoes, the German leopard tanks and the French frigates and more. A ready consuming market that actually expands globally and finally the possibility of a new profitable market. But that meant investment and Mekrelism forbids any investment.

In cases, defense and foreign policy, American geopolitics found a competitor who was also independent from the dollar, and this made a dangerous competitor.

And this is where NATO comes to serve American strategies and geopolitics and this is where Merkelism became Europe’s Achilles heel and where Putin unintentionally opened widely the doors for NATO to take over euro-defense and as consequence Americans to take over Europe’s foreign policy.

The first message came from France. Despite all reactions of the past few days, the French government decided not to deliver the Mistral battle ships that had build for Russia, regardless the financial damage. The move was more serious than it seems in the first look. It is radical change in French policies and especially under the leadership of a socialist president. It shows absolute surrender to the American demands. The American dominance in the European foreign and defense policy is absolute and final. I’m not judging why and how France took to build these battle ships for Putin, but the decision of the French presidency. After all the Americans are the last to judge something like that, except if they forgotten that Henry Ford, for example, was one of the best benefactors of the Nazi war machine till the beginning of the WWII. 

But here let’s return to the euro. What remains for the Europeans is the economy. Actually Merkelism made Thatcher’s dream true. United Europe having lost a united euro-defense mechanism and common foreign policy is limited to a common market with nearly half a billion sure consumers and a common currency to make their exchanges easier. But still independent from the US dollar with hopes for rebuilding the dream in the future still alive.

But even that still needs political support, it needs independence from rating agencies that serve American banking interests and it takes boldness to face political pressures. These American interests continue fighting euro using the political weakness of the EU leadership and the renewed dependency in defense and foreign policy. At the moment euro is standing strong and in an exchange rate higher than the dollar, but the day it will fall under the dollar it will also lose the trust of the international markets.

The European Bank opposing Merkelism and disobeying instructions from Merkel, lowered European interest rates to an all time low, reaching 0.25%. A move with meaning hoping to keep euro in over the US dollar and helping investment in euros. But the day when euro will fall under the US dollar and in case that will last for long, the European currency will lose everything built and soon will return to the US dollar dependency. That day the European Union will simply stop exist. There will be no reason for the euro and the member states will return to their former currencies purely for survival reasons.

All these will bring tremendous changes we are going to feel in the coming months. NATO will need to expand and cover totally Europe, therefore we will see countries like FYROM, a country with great interest for USA; secret bases, absolutely freedom of move with a lot of small Guantanamos and a lot of investments from the former US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the former vice-President Dick Cheney, but also a country that is the center of human and drugs trafficking in Europe. A country that covers absolutely none of the criteria demanded from an EU member. Or the entrance in the EU of Erdogan’s Turkey, despite the fact that today’s Turkey represents everything Europe opposes. And these are just examples of changes that might come and perhaps the most obvious visually examples.

Merkelism and the European leadership have made dramatic mistakes but that doesn’t mean that we should let an “ally” and a “friend” to make a use of them, to expand dominance over Europe and serve geopolitics that don’t necessary serve the European people. In the NATO summit in Wales, the European leadership surrendered the European sovereignty to NATO and in extent to the USA. This is totally unacceptable and one of the first consequences unfortunately will be the further rise of neo-Nazi and fascist groups in Europe. And all that …thanks to Putin!

Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author

Get it off your chest
 (comments policy)

Emanuel Paparella2014-09-06 16:10:57
Quite right, Thanos. Quite right. Putin has made NATO necessary and useful again. But that is not because Putin wants to do a favor to the EU or the US, or NATO for that matter. Without the Russian threat the alliance could well have been disbanded. It constitutes a financial drain on everybody concerned, including the US which pays twice as much to finance it as the whole EU combined. That money could be better spent on education and alleviating poverty and fighting drugs; but alas we don’t live in an ideal world.

So, thanks to Putin, whose ultimate strategy is to decouple the EU from the US and then break up the EU by good old nationalism, and then establish Russian hegemony and “prosperity” and “democracy,” Russian style, all over the European continent, NATO has found its original purpose again. That is indeed the other side of the coin of the complaints regarding the the anachronism of the NATO alliance and its negative effect.

The question arises, is the argument of the anachronism of NATO playing right into Putin’s goals? Logically following this line of reasoning, one must ask: after the fall of the Berlin Wall, were the EU leaders in the grip of a delusion within an illusion in believing that the bear had become a Dysneyfyed cute little bear, as we saw at the Winter Olympics just a few months before it swallowed Crimea whole?

Moreover, do Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Poland have a cause for concern. Why were they not applauding the sale of Mistral battle ships to Russia by France before the NATO summit? Ought those nations, former Soviet republics and now members of NATO, be concerned that the likes of Le Penne and most neo-Nazi groups in the EU who now sit pretty in the EU Parliament (as a Trojan horse of sort) and they not only like Putin’s authoritarian style, but have gone as far as praising his take-over of Crimea and his interference into the affairs of Ukraine, a sovereign nation. So the question arises: do those Europeans still think that the bear is a cute little benevolent bear. What is the alternative to the NATO alliance? Russia’s hegemony? That fantasy of Putin may never come to pass, but should we be abetting it?

Nikos Laios2014-09-07 03:25:16
Indeed,NATO is an anachronism that needs to end.Europe needs to find the confidence to find its own feet in the world; but where will the vision come from? Where will the inspired leadership come from?from a Germany that cowers at taking a dominant place geopolitically vis-a-vis conditioned by the dark shadows of WW2? It's time for the Europeans in the streets to take a stand; for many things could have been different.Russia could have been a friend and ally,Europe could have intervened and assisted the change in direction in Africa and the Middle East on many occasions.......it's time to stand up Europe,and if FYROM and Turkey ever gain entry into the EU, that's the day that Europe loses its moral and ethical integrity, and will be the end of the EU in my opinion.

Leah Sellers2014-09-07 21:21:23
I agree that Putin's Actions have re-stimulated NATO.
And the Disneyfied version of Russia has taken on the Dark, Shadelike "Malevolence" Energies of Capitlaism. Those Energies are BeComing their new secular State Reigion, and Putin and the Oligarchs are the Grand (and above and beyond the Law - because they Make and Bend them as needed) High Priests.

© Copyright CHAMELEON PROJECT Tmi 2005-2008  -  Sitemap  -  Add to favourites  -  Link to Ovi
Privacy Policy  -  Contact  -  RSS Feeds  -  Search  -  Submissions  -  Subscribe  -  About Ovi