Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

NATO Russia Founding Act - A Dead Letter

by Oui Mon Apr 25th, 2022 at 02:34:13 PM EST

Changing US foreign policy after George H. Bush and James Baker III, the unreliable partner for peace in the world.

From "Chicken Kiev" to Ukrainian Recognition: Domestic Politics in U.S. Foreign Policy toward Ukraine | Harvard Ukrainian Studies - by Susan Fink (1997) |

President Bush Remarks at the Supreme Soviet Building - Ukraine address 1 August 1991

Remarks to the Supreme Soviet of the Republic of the Ukraine in Kiev, Soviet Union - August 1, 1991 (transcript)


This is video footage of President Bush participates in a wreath laying ceremony at the War Memorial site in Kiev and gives remarks at the Bobiyar War Memorial Service.

Trip to Moscow and Kiev - 01 August 1991.

As the US military took over foreign policy from a Republican US Congress by urging NATO expansion in the 90s, the burden has lasted till this day.

The famous address by president Bush the elder in Kiev on 1 August 1991, it nearly sounds as if the American version of Nelson Mandela was speaking.

Tolerance nourishes hope. A priest wrote of glasnost: Today, more than ever the words of Paul the Apostle, spoken 2,000 years ago, ring out: They counted us among the dead, but look, we are alive. In Ukraine, in Russia, in Armenia, and the Baltics, the spirit of liberty thrives.

But freedom cannot survive if we let despots flourish or permit seemingly minor restrictions to multiply until they form chains, until they form shackles. Later today, I'll visit the monument at Babi Yar -- a somber reminder, a solemn reminder, of what happens when people fail to hold back the horrible tide of intolerance and tyranny. Yet freedom is not the same as independence. Americans will not support those who seek independence in order to replace a far-off tyranny with a local despotism. They will not aid those who promote a suicidal nationalism based upon ethnic hatred.

….
We are especially satisfied with the fact that you, Mr. President, came to our Republic right after the historic document, the Strategic Offensive Arms Reduction Treaty, had been signed in Moscow. The Ukrainian people consider this act as another concrete step towards the achievement of general and complete disarmament, toward a world without weapons and without wars.

….
Ukraine, as we all know, is the motherland of many hundreds of thousands of Americans. In fact, back home in Washington, DC, stands a statue of the Ukrainian poet and painter Taras Shevchenko. Once, reflecting on the democratic experiment in America, he wrote this: "When will we have a Washington with a new and righteous law? One day we shall have him."

You are a strong people, and your rich and glorious past spans centuries of upheaval and change. You first brought Christianity to this part of Europe, this crossroads of Europe and Asia. Christianity took hold here over a thousand years ago when Prince Vladimir of Kiev baptized his followers in the Dnieper River.

NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard | National Security Archive |

NATO and Russia: A Defensive Expansion?

NATO should have died with the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact. Instead, it is an unlikely institutional success story, now in its 72nd year of life, that adapted its role after its principal threat disappeared. However, despite a move towards a cooperative model with Russia in the early 1990s, it instead contributed to heightened tensions by destabilising the relationship between the two parties.

This essay traces the expansion process through memos, conversations, and academic debates of the period to show that despite its opposition to eastwards expansion, Russia made numerous concessions on the question and, despite nominally shifting to a more political role after the end of the Cold War, NATO continued to act as a realist military institution seeking zero-sum gains.

Further, by focussing on realist strategic outcomes rather than their political context, it was not only expansion itself that damaged NATO's relationship with Russia, but how it was conducted: the United States did not accord due importance to the perspective of its counterpart and ignored the political implications of how the expansion process unfolded. If expansion had been more politically aware and tactful, tensions between Russia and the West may have been tempered.

Former candidate for the Democratic nomination for US president Bill Bradley on the Cold War and Bill Clinton's lies to Russian president Yeltsin ...

VIDEO

A summary of most American war hawks preparing for Pax America and the New American Century.

Role Augustus: Pax Romana - 27 BCE and 180 CE

The Roman Republic became the Roman Empire in 27 BCE when Julius Caesar's adopted son, best known as Augustus, became the ruler of Rome. Augustus established an autocratic form of government, where he was the sole ruler and made all important decisions.

Although we refer to him as Rome's first emperor, Augustus never took the title of king or emperor, nor did his successors; they preferred to call themselves princeps, first citizen, or primus inter pares, first among peers. This choice of title maintained the appearance of limited power that had been so important under the Republic.

Many of the reforms enacted by Augustus and his successors had a deep and lasting impact on the internal political and economic structures of Rome.

Senate Hearing: The Debate On NATO Enlargement | Oct-Nov 1997 |

Hearing of October 22, 1997
Qualifications of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic for NATO

The Chairman Jesse Helms (R-NC). The committee will come to order.

Madam Secretary, as you know, we welcome you. We appreciate your being our lead-off witness as the Foreign Relations Committee begins its consideration of NATO expansion.

For nearly 50 years, NATO has defended democracy against communism and other forms of tyranny in Europe. Despite that success, many Americans will never forget the betrayal at Yalta which left millions of Europeans behind enemy lines.

Today, with the expansion of the NATO alliance, we have an historic opportunity to right that wrong by accepting Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic into NATO. All Americans should welcome these nations as they finally become equal partners in a community of democratic nations, thereby ensuring that their new democracies shall never again fall victim to tyranny.

Now, if Europe and the United States are to enjoy a century of peace, upcoming, one that does not replicate the bloody wars of the past century, we must embrace these democracies and guide them and show them away from their tragic histories of ethnic division and war.

That said, there's a right way and a wrong way to proceed with NATO expansion. We in the Senate recognize that this vital undertaking is not without cost to the United States, and I am convinced that the three new democracies are willing and eager to bear their fair share, but we must now make certain that our present NATO allies are likewise willing to fulfill their end of the bargain.

Just last week our allies made clear to us that they expect the United States, meaning the American taxpayers, to pay the lion's share of the cost of expansion. Now, Madam Secretary, ratification of NATO expansion by the U.S. Senate may very well succeed or fail on the question of whether you can dissuade our allies of that notion.

Further, we must resist any temptation by the leadership of our country to rush forward into an ill-considered NATO partnership with Russia. Now, while the United States is willing to take steps to demonstrate that NATO represents absolutely no threat to a democratic Russia, NATO's relations with Russia must be restrained by the reality that Russia's future commitment to peace and democracy, as of this date, is far from certain. In fact, I confess a fear that the United States' overture toward Russia may have already gone a bit far.

NATO Expansion Senate Hearing | C-span - Oct 1997 |

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee heard testimony from Secretary of State Madeleine Albright about the issue of NATO expansion. She spoke about the inclusion of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. She testified about the importance of NATO expansion to the security of emerging democracies in Eastern Europe. Sec. Albright also talked about the financing of NATO expansion by current members.

Prepared statement by Henry Kissinger on US-Russia relations ...

Build-in in fallacy as it was the founding of the EEC and later the European Union with its commitment to peace through economic ties that consolidated peace in Europe. Was NATO ever awarded the Nobel Prize?

What is the military threat that NATO expansion is designed to counter? How does expansion increase the security of Europe and the American people?

Administration's Response: Europe's security is a vital American interest, as we have seen through two world wars and the Cold War. Over the past half century, NATO has been our primary shield to protect that interest. With the Cold War over, NATO remains the foundation of trans Atlantic security. A larger, stronger NATO that includes Europe's new democracies will be even better able to provide for Europe's security and make America safer. It will help deter future threats, expand our collective defense capability to address traditional and non traditional security challenges and secure the historic gains of democracy in Europe. It is a key part of our strategy to build an undivided, democratic, peaceful Europe for the first time in history.

NATO's very existence is an important reason its current members and prospective new members face no imminent threat of attack. By adding new members to its strength, the world's most effective deterrent force will be even better able to prevent conflict from arising in the first place.

....
The alliance must be prepared for other contingencies, including the possibility that Russia could abandon democracy and return to the threatening behavior of the Soviet period, although we see such a turn as unlikely. Through our policy of engaging Russia we seek to provide strong incentives to deepen its commitment to democracy and peaceful relations with its neighbors. These efforts, combined with the process of NATO enlargement and the NATO Russia Founding Act, increase the likelihood that Russia will continue on the path of democratic and peaceful development.

Endgame in NATO's Enlargement: The Baltic States and Ukraine
| By Yaroslav Bilinsky - 1998 |

Related reading ...

World In Turmoil: Role of Brzezinski and Albright, Our Democrats | by Oui - Aug 2, 2014 |

Brzezinski blasts 'Bush's hollow fiction of Iraq war' | by Jerome a Paris - Jul 1, 2005 |

Bush, a liar taking the USA on a suicidal path. Pretty strong stuff...

The End of Conventional Arms Control and the Role of US Congress

Same strong words can be said of US path of NATO expansion and confrontation with Russia. Stop dreaming ...

Additional diaries on history relations Russia and Europe …


Display:
How the U.S. squandered the gains of the first Cold War ...

Bush Praises Union Treaty in Restive Ukraine | LA Times - 2 Aug 1991 |

KIEV, Soviet Union -- President Bush pointedly praised Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev and his Union Treaty on Thursday in the ancient city of Kiev, where surging Ukrainian nationalism could derail Gorbachev's ambitious plan to save the Soviet Union from disintegration.

Although Bush told the Ukrainian legislature that the United States would not try to choose between winners and losers in political competitions involving the republics and the central government in Moscow, he went on to praise the Union Treaty and cautioned against pursuing "the suicidal course of isolation."

    Yet freedom is not the same as independence. Americans will not support those who seek independence in order to replace a far-off tyranny with a local despotism. They will not aid those who promote a suicidal nationalism based upon ethnic hatred.

Bush delivered his not-entirely-welcome message first in an address to the legislature--the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic--and later at a luncheon set amid the baroque splendors of Mariinsky Palace, built in 1742 for the daughter of Czar Peter the Great and later used as a Bolshevik headquarters during the Russian Revolution.

How Gorbachev was misled over assurances against NATO expansion

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Mon Apr 25th, 2022 at 04:56:16 PM EST

Translation:
Small history lesson:
Without Genscher's and Baker's commitment to #Russia not to expand #NATO to the east, there would have been no German reunification.


'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Sun May 1st, 2022 at 06:16:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]


'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Fri Jun 10th, 2022 at 04:14:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

IHT - Putin expected to focus on energy in Dutch visit | Nov 3rd, 2005 |

Putin will lay a wreath at the Dutch National Monument² to the victims of World War II at Amsterdam's central Dam Square. He will also visit the former residence of Russian czar Peter the Great! located in Zaandam.

Putin's Russia: rich, powerful, unpredictable and malicious | by Jerome a Paris on Jan 9th, 2006 |

The text below comes from Edward Lucas, formerly the correspondent of the Economist in Moscow.

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Fri Jun 10th, 2022 at 04:16:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I've written often about extreme war hawk General Breedlove running circles around European leaders in NATO meetings and setting aggressive policy contra Putin and Russia.

Former NATO Commander Says Western Fears Of Nuclear War Are Preventing A Proper Response To Putin | RFERL - Apr 7, 2022 |

A former top NATO commander has said Western fears "about nuclear weapons and World War III" have left it "fully deterred" and Vladimir Putin "completely undeterred" as the Russian leader pursues his increasingly brutal invasion of Ukraine.

"We have ceded the initiative to the enemy," Philip Breedlove told RFE/RL's Georgian Service in a recent interview.

Breedlove is a retired four-star U.S. Air Force general who led U.S. forces in Europe and served as NATO's supreme allied commander from 2013 to 2016.

RFE/RL: Has NATO done enough to help Ukraine? Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has asked for more weapons.

Philip Breedlove: In my opinion, we have not. In warfare, you want to deter your enemy, you want to have the initiative and not give the enemy the initiative. And we have ceded the initiative to the enemy. There's a lot more we need to do in the role of being a provider. We have not gotten a medium- and high-altitude air defense there yet, we have not gotten coastal-defense cruise missiles there yet. I do not yet understand why we haven't gotten MiGs [fighter jets] there that other nations want to give them. So, there's a multitude of things even inside our restricted sort of format that we still need to do.

RFE/RL: Zelenskiy has told NATO leaders to never again tell him that Ukraine's military does not match NATO standards. Just how good is the Ukrainian Army?

Breedlove: Well, they're showing us just how good they are. They're magnificent. They have prepared a defensive depth. And they have thought very hard about how to fight with a smaller and less well-provided-for force against a larger and much heavier mechanical force. And it has worked so far like a charm and, of course, it means they use up a lot of ammunition and military weaponry and that's where the West now has to step up its game and give the Ukrainian military what it needs to fight.

RFE/RL: Iraq, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Libya are all places where NATO, a defensive alliance, intervened in the past to stave off a humanitarian catastrophe. Is the reason it has not done the same in Ukraine boil down to Moscow having nuclear weapons?

Breedlove: As I mentioned before, the bottom line is we in the West, certainly my nation, and NATO, are completely deterred in this matter. We have been so worried about nuclear weapons and World War III that we have allowed ourselves to be fully deterred. And [Putin], frankly, is completely undeterred. He has switched into the most horrific war against the citizens of Ukraine, it is beyond criminal at this point.



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Mon Apr 25th, 2022 at 06:52:07 PM EST


'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Mon Apr 25th, 2022 at 08:13:25 PM EST


'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Mon Apr 25th, 2022 at 08:33:15 PM EST
Lloyd Austin: "In terms of our ... ehh their ability to win, is ... and so they believe we could win ... "



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Mon Apr 25th, 2022 at 08:34:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The analyst points out that these countries, including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, will make every possible effort to ensure that the measures they will have to take against Russia do not harm their relations with Moscow much but are sensational enough to satisfy the West. "Turkey's move to close its airspace to Russian planes bound for Syria is one of such steps. It won't become much of a problem for our forces stationed in Syria because warplanes use a corridor above Iran and Iraq and most cargoes are delivered by sea.

The air corridor above Turkey was largely used for delegations visiting Syria and the deployment of troops. Nothing catastrophic will happen if these flights take a bit more time," the expert noted.

He emphasized, however, that the decision made by Turkey might be followed by other steps, which would prove to be more painful for Russia, particularly as far as Syria was concerned. "That said, the airspace closure may be viewed as a signal to Moscow," the analyst concluded.



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Mon Apr 25th, 2022 at 08:48:27 PM EST
The Russians were spies, our agents have clean hands ...

Berlin says Russia's expulsion of diplomats 'not justified' | Al Jazeera |

Germany Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock has condemned Russia's announcement that it will expel 40 German diplomatic staff.

The move by Moscow was said to by a symmetrical response to Germany's expulsion of the same number of staff from Russian diplomatic missions earlier this month.

However, Baerbock said the Russian staff expelled from Germany had been spies, rather than diplomats.

"We expected today's step, but it is in no way justified," Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said in a statement.

Baerbock said that the 40 Russian diplomats expelled by Berlin "did not serve diplomacy for a single day" while those who were expelled by Russia had "not done anything wrong."



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Mon Apr 25th, 2022 at 09:17:18 PM EST


'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Mon Apr 25th, 2022 at 09:22:53 PM EST
A key ally of NATO under US sanctions doen not want further escalation versus Russia.



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Fri May 13th, 2022 at 05:14:09 PM EST
Turkey Signals it Would Veto NATO Accession of Finland, Sweden

Turkey would not positively welcome Finland and Sweden joining the NATO alliance, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said Friday, describing the initiative as a mistake.

"We do not have a positive opinion. Scandinavian countries are like a guest house for terrorist organizations," Erdoğan told reporters after Friday prayers in Istanbul, indicating that Turkey could use its status as a member of the Western military alliance to veto moves to admit the two countries.

Erdogan said Turkey's former rulers "made a mistake" by giving a green light to Greece's NATO membership in 1952.

"We, as Turkey, do not want to make a second mistake on this issue," he stressed.

Turkey's veto would satisfy Russia

A Turkish veto on the accession of the two Scandinavian counties would offer an unexpected propaganda victory for Russia, which has threatened NATO with retaliation if it goes ahead with the plan.

Turkey slams US over Syria move

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Fri May 13th, 2022 at 05:14:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

S. Ossetia: Russian Annexation Referendum Slated for July 17

Editorial | Pawning the Country

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Sat May 14th, 2022 at 07:37:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Russia's Strategic Partnership with Europe | ISS Quarterly 2004 by Dow Lynch |

Shortly before the twelfth Russian-European Union in early November 2003, in an interview in the Italian press, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated, `For us Europe is a major trade and economic partner, and our natural most important partner, including in the political sphere. Russia is not located on the American continent, after all, but in Europe." Russia, he continued, "Is interested in developing relations with our partners in the U.S. and the American continent as a whole and in Asia, but, of course, above all with Europe."

Putin has de opted significant time and energy to developing relations with the EU since his appointment as Prime Minister in 1999 and was involved in writing and presenting Russia's official strategy to the EU in October of the same year.  Sunce 2000, driven by the new president, the Russian government has sought to add substance to the strategic partnership that was declared between. Is ow and Brussels.

    "Putin aspires to help globalization and not have Russia shaped by it."


'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Fri May 13th, 2022 at 09:23:55 PM EST
Russia's Strategic Partnership with Europe

Even after launching ESDP --European Spatial Development Perspective-- in 1999, the EU lacked strategic vision in assessing the potential of Russia as a major military power (Forsberg 2004); despite emphasis by the first Putin administration on Russia's aligning itself with the Euro-Atlantic community (Lynch 2003;10-12; Averre 2005), there were few signs of political will to construct a genuine strategic framework for the relationship. Despite an extensive array of institutional arrangements, the deficit of common understandings based on shared interests and the complexity of both sides' decision-making processes in the EU's case, various loci of decision-making, also involving new member states from central Europe and the Baltics which have complicated historical relations with Russia, and in the Russian case the influence on the executive of numerous bureaucratic agencies and interest groupsnarrowed the possibilities to build trust.



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Fri May 13th, 2022 at 09:24:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Russia's Sovereign Globalization Rise, Fall and Future | Chatham House - Jan 2016 |

Russia's relationship with the global economy has developed quite differently: it has been an arc. In 2000 the Putin presidency began by committing Russia to deeper engagement with the global economy and its governance, a goal actively supported by the West. By 2007, the mid-point of this period, every strand of Russia's relationship with the international economic system had thickened and strengthened significantly: Russia had just chaired the G8 for the first time and was soon to call for `modernizing alliances' with the West. But today Russia's president speaks of minimizing dependence on the West while, for the first time since the end of the Cold War, the West now seeks to restrict, rather than promote, Russia's integration into the global economy. On no other issue have the outcomes departed so comprehensively from the original intentions of Russia and the West alike.

What explains this remarkable reversal? The answer lies in the working out of a central tension between two fundamental but opposing impulses in the Putin project: to re-establish a strong, centralized and controlling state and to build a prosperous country through integration into the global economy. The first has entailed strong centralized state control over citizens and institutions (in Russian parlance, the vertikal of power), while the second has entailed autonomous, horizontal flows of goods and money across borders, linking Russia to actors and jurisdictions beyond its formal reach.



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Fri May 13th, 2022 at 09:25:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Director of UNESCO's Division of Human Rights, Democracy and Peace - 1996

      Constructing a culture of peace:
      challenges and perspectives - an
      introductory note

      Janusz Symonides* and Kishore Singh**

A CULTURE OF PEACE: A NECESSITY FOR OUR TIME

At the end of the twentieth century humankind is still confronted with numerous
armed conflicts, with the illegal use of military force and with various forms of
violence. Permanent and lasting peace and security still remain as a goal to be
achieved, as they were fifty years ago at the moment of the creation of the United
Nations system.

An analysis of the present situation leads to the conclusion that the main objective formulated in UNESCO's Constitution half a century ago, namely the construction of the defence of peace in the minds of men and women, is more than ever valid. Indeed, `a peace based exclusively upon the political and economic arrangements  of governments  would  not  be  a  peace  which  could  secure  the unanimous, lasting and sincere support of the peoples of the world... and peace must therefore be founded, if it is not to fail, upon the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind'.

In  a  world  where  many  regions  suffer  from  increasing  tensions,  conflicts and violence, to make peace a tangible reality is of critical importance. Ethno-nationalism,  xenophobia,  racism  and  discrimination  against  minority  groups, religious extremism and violations of human rights are the cause of an increasing number  of  local  and  regional  conflicts.  Violence  fuelled  by  hate  and  directed against non-nationals, refugees and asylum-seekers, and immigrant workers is a serious threat to domestic security and the very fabric of states themselves. At the same time, exclusion, poverty, urban decay, mass migration, environmental degradation and new pandemic diseases, as well as terrorism and traffic in drugs, create very real threats to internal and international security.

The present culture of violence based on distrust, suspicion, intolerance and hatred, on the inability to interact constructively with all those who are different, must  be  replaced  by  a  new  culture  based  on  non-violence,  tolerance,  mutual understanding  and  solidarity,  on  the  ability  to  solve  peacefully  disputes  and conflicts. The world is in need of such a new culture and of a common system of values and new behavioural patterns for individuals, groups and nations, for, without them, the major problems of international and internal peace and security cannot be solved.

The end of the Cold War and of ideological confrontation between East and West created new possibilities for the United Nations system and for the whole of the international community to move towards a culture of peace. Not only has the threat of a global nuclear war been removed to a great extent but the role of the military factor in international relations is decreasing. This, in consequence, paves the way towards disarmament and demilitarization both internationally and internally and towards the elimination of enemy images, distrust and suspicion. Moreover, the sharp divisions and useless debates concerning the concept of human rights are being replaced by recognition that the promotion and protection of all human rights is an important element of peace and development and, as such, is a great concern of the international community as well as a priority objective of the United Nations.

The attacks on America on 11/9 by OBL and Al Qaeda changed the course of history. The response by the GWB administration for a War On Terror, Patriot Act legislation, NSA spying and the lies and propaganda from the UK and Tony Blair has an Enduring Legacy of failure for humanity.

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Wed May 25th, 2022 at 06:30:01 PM EST


'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Mon May 30th, 2022 at 02:03:56 PM EST
DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW CONCERNING FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION AMONG STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS

PREAMBLE

The General Assembly,

Reaffirming in the terms of the Charter of the United Nations that the maintenance of international peace and security and the development of friendly relations and co-operation between nations are among the fundamental purposes of the United Nations,

Recalling that the peoples of the United Nations are determined to practise tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours,

Bearing in mind the importance of maintaining and strengthening international peace founded upon freedom, equality, justice and respect for fundamental human rights and of developing friendly relations among nations irrespective of their political, economic and social systems or the levels of their development,

Bearing in mind also the paramount importance of the Charter of the United Nations in the promotion of the rule of law among nations,

Considering that the faithful observance of the principles of international law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among States and the fulfillment in good faith of the obligations assumed by States, in accordance with the Charter, is of the greatest importance for the maintenance of international peace and security and for the implementation of the other purposes of the United Nations,

Noting that the great political, economic and social changes and scientific progress which have taken place in the worldNsince the adoption of the Charter give increased importance to these principles and to the need for their more effective application in the conduct of States wherever carried on,

Recalling the established principle that outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means, and mindful of the fact that consideration is being given in the United Nations to the question of establishing other appropriate  provisions similarly inspired,

Convinced that the strict observance by States of the obligation not to intervene in the affairs of any other State is an essential condition to ensure that nations live together in peace with one another, since the practice of any form of intervention not only violates the spirit and letter of the Charter, but also leads to the creation of situations which threaten international peace and security,

Recalling the duty of States to refrain in their international relations from military, political, economic or any other form of coercion aimed against the political independence or territorial integrity of any State,

Considering it essential that all States shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations,

Considering it equally essential that all States shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in accordance with the Charter,

Reaffirming, in accordance with the Charter, the basic importance of sovereign equality and stressing that the purposes of the United Nations can be implemented only if States enjoy sovereign equality and comply fully with the requirements of this principle in their international relations,

Convinced that the subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a major obstacle to the promotion of international peace and security,

Convinced that the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples constitutes a significant contribution to contemporary international law, and that its effective application is of paramount importance for the promotion of friendly relations among States, based on respect for the principle of sovereign equality,

Convinced in consequence that any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and territorial integrity of a State or country or at its political independence is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter,

.... and so on.



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Wed Jun 8th, 2022 at 06:51:37 PM EST
The North Atlantic Treaty
Washington D.C. - 4 April 1949

Preamble

The Parties to this Treaty reaffirm their faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments.
They are determined to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilisation of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. They seek to promote stability and well-being in the North Atlantic area.
They are resolved to unite their efforts for collective defence and for the preservation of peace and security. They therefore agree to this North Atlantic Treaty :

Northern Atlantic and the Tropic of Cancer

Article 6
For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:

  • on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France 2, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
  • on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.


'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Thu Jun 9th, 2022 at 05:15:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
NATO's Next Strategic Concept: How the Alliance's New Strategy will Reshape Global Security | Strategic Studies Quarterly - Winter 2010 |

Capping months of diplomatic signaling--and to no one's eventual surprise--the declaration capping the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's most recent summit at Strasbourg and Kehl confirmed what members have been saying for some time: "The organization needs a new strategy." The last one, signed over a decade ago, followed on the heels of the NATO intervention in Kosovo and Bosnia. Since then the United States has endured a traumatic terrorist attack and become bogged down in Afghanistan and Iraq with a handful of increasingly reluctant NATO partners.

Born as a bulwark against the Soviet Union in 1949, the alliance survived the fall of communism by expanding its portfolio from the mere static defense of each other's borders to enhancing regional stability through engagement and enlargement. Now NATO is facing a new reality, and the call for a new strategic concept goes to the heart of its relevancy.

While NATO has grown from a cozy club of 16 nations to a com- munity of 28--welcoming Albania and Croatia into the fold at Strasbourg and Kehl--it is precisely this growth that some perceive as crippling its ability to gain the consensus necessary for decisive action. Declining demographics and the current economic crisis are leading Europeans to prioritize social spending over defense expenditures. Few nations spend anywhere near NATO's informally agreed upon 2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on defense. While yesterday's flagship operation was peace-keeping in the nearby Balkans, today's challenge is nation building in far-flung Afghanistan. In part as a distraction from its domestic woes--and further complicating the matter--a newly resurgent Russia is increasingly antagonistic towards the Euro-Atlantic partnership. This has created a rift between newer NATO affiliates who favor the traditional focus on territorial defense over their long-tenured colleagues' preferences toward preparing for newer, more salient challenges.

All this has led, once again, to calls for the alliance to reinvent itself through a refreshed strategic concept, and in its discernment the alliance will rely upon the collective wisdom of the "group of experts" led by former US ambassador Madeleine K. Albright. NATO will only continue to be relevant if the United States views its European partners as capable of assisting with the global security workload and if Europe views the United States as a guarantor of European stability and prosperity. Recent events have demonstrated the limits of European aspirations--which remain regionally focused. Their lack of global ambitions, nevertheless, should not dissuade the United States from seeing its European partners as integral to American security. Leveraging NATO's capabilities will provide America a strategic buffer and democratic bulwark against emerging threats. Getting NATO's next strategy right, therefore, has important implications for American and European security.



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Mon Jun 20th, 2022 at 01:52:35 PM EST
Seems like the NATO idea was rooted in the economic and military situation that prevailed during the Cold War. It is not at all apparent as to why the US should be so deeply engaged in Europe's security.
by asdf on Mon Jun 20th, 2022 at 02:48:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Changed in the last 15 years ... after the Afghan and Iraq campaign forming an expeditionary force to fight in Libya and Syria. Under Trump Europe was nearly cut lose to great frustration of the MIC. Rapidly corrected under Joe Biden to carry its own weight, invest in the military apparatus and become part of new vision to secure interests in the Middle East in confronting Iran and in the Far East to preserve the trade ties in the Indo-Pacific.

Unfortunately NATO and the US have decided to estrange Russia from 2004 forward and declare it a pariah state, today an enemy state. The EU got hit by Brexit and strong economic ties with Russia (founding principle of the E.E.C.) was seen as a threat to US might. Under Trump, the government pursued the Rumsfeld strategy to divide the EU into New Europe and Old Europe. Germany was sanctioned as the US pivoted to the Far East.

Let blood flow to secure the alliance for decades to come ... the EU is a dead man walking. Instill FEAR to get the psychological mindset of survival mode and unite -- circle the wagons, no dissent.

** designate a pariah state as per Atlantic Council by former US Ambassador to NATO, Ivo Daalder and Secretary of State John Kerry.

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Mon Jun 20th, 2022 at 03:35:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]


'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Fri Jun 24th, 2022 at 12:55:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The Future of NATO Enlargement after the Ukraine Crisis | Sept. 2015 by Andrew T. Wolff at Dickinson College |

The alliance's norm-driven enlargement policy has hindered the creation of an enduring NATO-Russia cooperative relationship and helped fuel the outbreak of conflict in Georgia and Ukraine. In light of this, NATO should alter its current enlargement policy by infusing it with geopolitical rationales. This means downgrading the transformative and democratization elements of enlargement and, instead, focusing on how candidate countries add to NATO capabilities and impact overall alliance security. A geopolitically-driven enlargement policy would prioritize countries in the Balkan and Scandinavian regions for membership and openly exclude Georgia and Ukraine from membership. Ultimately, this policy would have the effect of strengthening NATO while giving it more flexibility in dealing with Russia

....
Even before NATO began to debate the policy of enlargement openly, the Russian government under Boris Yeltsin judged that eastward expansion of the alliance would be a threat to Russia's national interests. As NATO authorized a formal study of enlargement at the end of 1994, Russian hostility to the idea became openly shrill. At the December 1994 Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe conference in Budapest, President Yeltsin spoke in harsh tones about NATO enlargement and said that the pursuit of this policy put `Europe in danger of plunging into a cold peace. Russia's hostility to enlarge- ment continued throughout the mid-1990s until the Founding Act of May 1997 created a new basis for NATO-Russian relations through the establishment of the Permanent Joint Council. The Founding Act smoothed the road for NATO's first eastward expansion to incorporate the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland in 1999; but having an institutional relationship with NATO did not fully convince Russia of the benignity of NATO enlargement. Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov considered the Founding Act to be merely damage limitation, and Russian hostility towards the policy continued to simmer. In February 1999, Russia declared that any further expansion of NATO would cross a `red line'. Soon after this declaration, the centrepiece of NATO's new relationship with Russia, the Permanent Joint Council, failed because of the war in Kosovo.

The 'no expansion' pledge

There is ample evidence to support Russia's complaint that western leaders prom- ised not to expand NATO to the east. During the 2+4 negotiations to reunify the two Germanies, US Secretary of State James Baker and German Foreign Minister Hans-Dieter Genscher gave assurances to the Soviets that NATO would not expand after the incorporation of East Germany. In a meeting with Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze and Soviet Prime Minister Mikhail Gorbachev at the Kremlin on 9 February 1990, Baker asked: `Would you prefer to see a united Germany outside of NATO and with no US forces, or would you prefer a unified Germany to be tied to NATO, with assurances that NATO's jurisdiction would not shift one inch eastward from its present position?'  

Genscher stated in a speech at the Tutzing Protestant Academy on 31 January 1990: 'What NATO must do is state unequivocally that whatever happens in the Warsaw Pact there will be no expansion of NATO territory eastwards, that is to say closer to the borders of the Soviet Union.'  Also, NATO Secretary-General Manfred Wörner said the alliance did not seek a `shift of balance or an extension of its military borders to the east'. Russia claims statements such as these prove that western leaders pledged to limit NATO's growth.

The West's rebuttal of Russia's claim is three-pronged. First, it argues that the `no expansion' pledge pertained only to NATO military forces within East Germany and did not apply to other ex-communist countries which were not a party to the 2+4 negotiations. Second, it maintains that any supposed promise is invalid because it was not codified in a treaty and does not carry the force of law. Third, NATO emphasizes that the supposed 'no expansion' pledge is a violation of the 1975 Helsinki Charter which enshrines the right of a country to choose its own alliances. Even so, NATO knew it risked sparking Russian hostility when it began to craft the policy of enlargement. Alliance leaders downplayed this danger because they believed Russia could be persuaded by their arguments of NATO's new-found benevolence and their offers of a new cooperative partnership.



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Thu Jun 23rd, 2022 at 09:43:40 AM EST
NATO Expansion - The Budapest Blow Up 1994 | National Archives | [Released Nov. 24, 2021 after FOIA requests]

The Yeltsin eruption on December 5, 1994, made the top of the front page of the New York Times the next day, with the Russian president's accusation (in front of Clinton and other heads of state gathered for a summit of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, CSCE) that the "domineering" U.S. was "trying to split [the] continent again" through NATO expansion. The angry tone of Yeltsin's speech echoed years later in his successor Vladimir Putin's famous 2007 speech at the Munich security conference, though by then the list of Russian grievances went well beyond NATO expansion to such unilateral U.S. actions as withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the invasion of Iraq.

Where Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump failed, Joe Biden succeeded in 2022. For future generations, a new modern Soviet barrier to fall.

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Thu Jun 23rd, 2022 at 09:45:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Top NATO Commanders clashed over participation Russian forces at Pristina airfield

"I'm not going to start World War III for you," Mike Jackson is quoted as telling NATO Commander Wesley Clark after the incident. Clark was relieved three months early.

Pentagon officials stated that while NATO members are under the command of the supreme allied commander, they also have the right to refuse orders not in their national interest.

NATO's 19 members operate by consensus and any one country can veto a decision.
Pentagon officials said that the British government wanted to avoid a military confrontation over what was essentially a diplomatic dispute with the Russians.

The Kosovo war was illegal as there was no UN Security Council resolution for military engagement. NATO used high-altitude bombing causing many civilian casualties.

The Kosovo Report | IICK Sweden |

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Thu Jun 23rd, 2022 at 09:45:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Believing Ret. Gen. Wesley Clark is a rational human being worthy to suggest a policy on global security?

How Biden Can Go Bold with Putin | Washington Monthly by Wesley Clark - June 6, 2021 |

So why not go bold? Seize the moment. Make Putin a surprise offer that he cannot easily refuse. The U.S. has the power of its economy and the dollar--the global financial system. After telling Putin that Russia must "knock off" this "war" on democracy, that Russia has no right to a sphere of influence, that it cannot interfere in the internal politics of other states, and that Russia must respect human rights and international law, Biden should show teeth. If present Russian actions continue, the president should pledge to strengthen sanctions against Putin's associates under the Magnitsky Act, reduce Russian access to the international banking system, including the use of SWIFT, block technology transfers to all Russian companies, and pursue a G-7 plan to revisit and block the Nordstream2 gas project.

Then, Biden should offer a carrot: Explain that it doesn't have to go this way. Russia can be brought back into the G-8, the U.S. can end the sanctions against it, and Biden can help bring hundreds of billions of dollars of green energy infrastructure investment into the country. Even NATO itself can be reoriented. But the president should be clear that Putin must reorient Russia itself. He must replace potentially violent nation-state rivalries with cooperative endeavors to deal with climate change; the threats of pandemics; and new opportunities in science, technology, and space.

Putin must respect the rights of people everywhere. Biden should try and work out a step-by-step process that will deescalate Russia's actions against international law and the West, and simultaneously, step-by-step, reintegrate Russia into the world community on a new basis of understanding and conduct. He should ask Putin to jointly announce their intent, and have their staff begin work on this "road map" today. If Putin refuses, then Putin's intent is clear--and the U.S. and the West should immediately go after his personal, illicit funds worldwide.



'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Thu Jun 23rd, 2022 at 09:47:02 AM EST


'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Thu Jun 23rd, 2022 at 09:48:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

Top Diaries