NATO : MAKING FEAR PAY

NATO lost its purpose when the Soviet Union fell apart but its influence was so strong across the elites of Europe that envisaging its demise was unthinkable for them.

This was a failure of courage, leadership and responsibility.

Instead of disbanding NATO the decision made was instead to expand it.

But who was the enemy? NATO needed an enemy. Otherwise what was the reason for its existence?

Soon enough an enemy was found. It was to be Russia, a Russia making its way toward a new system of governance after the chaos that followed the dissolution of the USSR. This was to be the new target for NATO where career structures rewarding men and women with sky-high salaries needed to be preserved.

Russia, humbled and in total disarray with a drunk in charge was to be the new enemy required to keep NATO in existence. But its very emergence from its various miseries was to be the primary source for NATO’s continuance.

How did this come about? 

As the twentieth century dawned Russia was in a mess. Its social net designed to maintain the population in good health and with a decent education had collapsed and almost ceased to exist altogether. A criminal network, the Russian mafia had arisen which threatened to take over as a ruling power nationwide it built its wealth through extortion, robbery and corruption. In parallel with the Russian mafia a group of predominantly men began to rise in wealth and power via Yeltsin’s privatizations. These would become Russia’s infamous oligarchs. They snapped up the privatization shares that the everyday Russian citizen had been issued with but had no experience in and had no clue as to their value or what to do with them.

In the Kremlin western advice and influence had prevailed while a series of advisers had come and gone as Yeltsin and his people haplessly tried to cope with what must surely have seemed an insurmountable problem... how to get Russia back on her feet.

Meanwhile in the Caucuses Islamists attempted to wrest Dagestan and Chechnya from Russia by force of arms and were on the brink of succeeding. Apartment blocks were being targeted in terrorist acts. There were terrorist outrages such as in Beslan in 2004 where Islamists held over a thousand including almost eight hundred children hostage in a school with tragic results.

There appeared no way that Russia could emerge from its misery, the task seemed impossible with so many negative factors working to create an unmanageable chaos across the entire nation.

In these years life expectancy fell massively in Russia as factories closed and whole industries disappeared. Almost the entire society had to be built from scratch and as in every society there were those determined to take full advantage.

The prospect of dealing with all the problems involved in this goal became too much for Yeltsin and he began the task of choosing a successor from among around twenty candidates.

As we know, he eventually chose Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Putin was given the task of turning round what appeared to be an almost impossible situation. Putin at first refused feeling inadequate to the task (and how many would not feel exactly the same emotion?) Eventually however Putin accepted this poisoned chalice and set to work.

His first tasks were to win the wars in the Caucuses and deal with the rising tide of the oligarchs who were seeking political power through their wealth. Western elites had convinced Yeltsin to invest the Russian presidency with much greater power than before and these powers he had passed to Putin.

He flew to the Caucuses where Russian military morale was at an all-time low and brought together the generals in charge of the campaign. His bearing at that time and his obvious determination to bring the war to the right conclusion convinced them to fight on with renewed hope. Within weeks they had prevailed. One of Russia’s massive problems had been solved.

Putin then turned his attention to the massively wealthy and influential oligarchs who were at that time seeking political power with which to further enrich themselves. Another negative factor in relation to the oligarchs was that they were paying no taxes in the increasingly lawless Russia that had followed the country’s collapse. This, even as the citizenry of Russia suffered all around them.

Putin knew it would be no easy task to deal with this next problem but called the oligarchs to the Kremlin for a meeting. The oligarchs felt invincible and threatened him saying they could destroy him if he moved against them. But Putin was determined and knew what he must do to get Russia on the road to recovery and slowly, step by step he was able to pressure them them into paying taxes. He was also able to dissuade them from seeking political office.

Progress was slow in retrieving a Russia on her knees toward the once again proud and strong Russia of the present day. But taxes from the oligarchs and the income from a recovering oil industry led the way. The debilitating and expensive wars in the Caucuses were resolved. The foundations of future economic growth were laid and a determined man led the country. The effect of Putin’s leadership cannot be discounted as the primary factor in all this. Without this man with an indomitable will in command the country would surely have fallen to the oligarchs and the Russian mafia and a failed state would have ensued.

One primary accusation is repeatedly levied against Putin, that he did not create western-style democracy in Russia. This is true, but what would have been the effect of this if he had pursued that goal before now? There would have been a diminishing of the until now much needed power of the presidency to do what he had done. It would have put at risk the whole project of restoring the quality of life of Russians that had been so decimated in these terrible years. It would have risked criminal elements coming to power and stealing the remaining wealth of the country, either at the hands of the Russian mafia or the oligarchs.

In recent months Putin has seen that the time has come to move more quickly toward a less powerful presidency and greater democracy. However, none of this has been recognized in the West where its elites continue to point to Putin as a net negative in Russia, a claim that considering his massive achievements there is such a travesty of justice and so obviously wrong.

It was in 2007, in Munich however that Putin became enemy number one of western elites. From 2000 to 2007 it had seemed Putin would be accepted as a sober Yeltsin figure, easy to predict and manipulate. His speech in February of that year at the Munich Security Conference disabused them of this idea.

 In Putin’s speech he spoke of his disagreement with the concept of a unipolar world where one nation’s demands were always to be met and where that nation felt it had the inalienable right to inflict destabilization and violence against other sovereign states at its will. He made clear that Russia would follow her own path and not be forced by others to obey their demands. At the same time he said Russia would work in close cooperation with all other responsible states against the great threats to them all such as international terrorism and the dangers of nuclear proliferation.

The speech did not go down well at all. From that day onward Putin became the enemy of the western elites. His name was vilified in every article and book written.

Putin being the first world leader calling George W. Bush after 9/11 offering Russia’s assistance didn’t help, neither did him broaching the idea of Russia joining the European Union and NATO. He had deigned to contemplate Russia being a fully sovereign nation with her own foreign policy and national interests and he was subsequently damned.

This is the backdrop to Russia, led by Putin being the most compelling reason for NATO’s continuing and expanded presence. The NATO leadership must surely have rubbed their hands gleefully as Putin was demonized relentlessly and their press coordination teams were not slow to add their warnings.

As the West saw the great advantages involved in taking ex-Warsaw Pact countries into both the EU and NATO the future Cold War was assured. As was the future of NATO.

Then, the large protests on Kiev’s Maidan Square were fixed upon as yet another opportunity to bring pressure to bear on Russia. American officials and politicians were galvanized to appear in front of the crowds bearing every type of weapon from revolvers to hunting rifles, to toxic sprays, heavy chains, wooden bats laced with nails, bricks and Molotov Cocktails. These were the “peaceful protestors” the then President Obama warned the lightly armed police not to harm.

The gaining of Ukraine into the western fold potentially put NATO right on Russia’s doorstep. This was intolerable for Russia as the main architect of the West’s containment policy regarding the Soviet Union, George Kennan, had accurately forecast in 1998 as the first few ex-Warsaw Pact nations joined NATO. In his Nineties, shortly before he died, he said the following:

''I think it is the beginning of a new cold war.''

I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the Founding Fathers of this country turn over in their graves. We have signed up to protect a whole series of countries, even though we have neither the resources nor the intention to do so in any serious way. [NATO expansion] was simply a lighthearted action by a Senate that has no real interest in foreign affairs.''

''What bothers me is how superficial and ill informed the whole Senate debate was.  ''I was particularly bothered by the references to Russia as a country dying to attack Western Europe. Don't people understand? Our differences in the cold war were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime.

''And Russia's democracy is as far advanced, if not farther, as any of these countries we've just signed up to defend from Russia. It shows so little understanding of Russian history and Soviet history. Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then [the NATO expanders] will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are -- but this is just wrong.''

''This has been my life, and it pains me to see it so screwed up in the end.''

And so it has been as Mr Kennan predicted.

NATO has survived and an enemy has been created which massive resources are continually expended upon in ensuring people continue to believe in. The level of propaganda permeating the West regarding the various supposed evils of the Russian state have never been greater, not even during the first Cold War. We are asked to believe that almost everything negative is due to a Russian plot or influence. Russian interference is described as near universal, ongoing and never-ending.

The fear generated is constant. It will never abate no matter the objective reality. It matters not that that evidence is in great short supply. The supply of mere assertions, rumors, accusations opinions, theories and suppositions regarding the evils of Putin and the Russian state have become an industry in and of themselves. They stoke the endless fear that must remain in place to maintain the new and even harder global division that western elites need to maintain their status, power and influence.

Fear, as ever, is the key. It maintains a status quo benefiting elites with little to no interest in the lives of the 99%. The maintenance of the  status quo of wealth and power among western elites is the paramount goal far above all others, including the possibility of global cooperation and peace.

And one of the primary entities ensuring the status quo remains is NATO.

And it is kept in place through one primary emotion, fear.

NATO : MAKING FEAR PAY.