Tag: nato

NATO, More Militarism No Defense Against US Expansionists

If you believe Donald Trump might invade you should be calling for Canada to withdraw from NATO. The alliance won’t defend Canada, has enabled US interference and gobbles up resources.

During a recent meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, US President Donald Trump questioned the border and Canadian sovereignty. He said, “if you look at a map, they drew an artificial line right through it, between Canada and the U.S. … somebody did it a long time ago, many many decades ago, and (it) makes no sense.” Trump also repeatedly said Canada should be a US state, noting “to be honest with you, Canada only works as a state.”

Sitting next to the US president, Rutte stayed silent. A bit later Trump suggested Rutte might assist him in taking part of NATO member Denmark, noting “I’m sitting with a man who could be very instrumental. You know Mark, we need that for international security.” Rutte replied, “when it comes to Greenland yes or not joining the U.S. I would leave that outside for me this discussion because I don’t want to drag NATO in that.”

Rutte doesn’t seem to want to commit even rhetorically to defending alliance members’ sovereignty. Even if Rutte had interrupted Trump and told the US president his comments were inappropriate the idea that NATO would defend Canada from a US invasion is ridiculous. Latvia and Estonia will not send troops to repel a US invasion. Nor will France or the UK.

Will Canada send troops to defend Greenland if Trump takes it from NATO member Denmark? Does anyone think that would that be a good idea?

Article 5 of the NATO Charter is not clear on what collective defence entails. It says an attack against one member “shall be considered an attack against them all.” But it doesn’t stipulate what the response should be, noting only that each member state must take “such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force.” Article 5 has only ever been invoked after the September 11, 2001, attacks in the US.

Keep reading

Swiss Think-Tank: US Intel Investigating Anthony Blinken For Potential Involvement in Romania’s Globalist Coup

A Swiss think tank has reported that U.S. intelligence agencies, allegedly acting under the directives of the Trump administration, are investigating former Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and his assistant James O’Brien for purportedly pressuring Romanian authorities to annul the country’s presidential election results.

According to the report, Blinken—an arch-neocon and influential figure in America’s globalist, interventionist foreign policy establishment—collaborated with former Romanian Foreign Minister Luminița Odobescu to pressure officials in Bucharest into annulling Călin Georgescu’s first-round presidential victory, thereby ensuring Romania remained aligned with pro-NATO and globalist interests.

The Diplomatic Affairs, a Geneva-based think tank focused on assessing global geopolitical developments, told The Gateway Pundit that its report is based on information they received from a source within the U.S. intelligence community.

The allegations raise serious concerns about the extent of foreign interference, particularly from the Biden administration, in Romania’s domestic politics. The Swiss think tank’s report suggests that Blinken and his associates actively lobbied key Romanian figures, including former President Klaus Iohannis and Acting Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu, to invalidate the election under the pretext of Russian interference.

The report, if true, lends support to statements made last month by Richard Grenell, former Special Envoy under Trump, who asserted that it was Biden, not Russia, that interfered in Romania’s recent election.

Keep reading

Rutte Confirms NATO Membership For Ukraine Off The Table, Hints At Future Normalization With Russia

In fresh comments NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte confirmed that NATO membership for Ukraine is off the table when it comes to negotiations with Russia to end the war.

Rutte in an interview Friday was asked by Bloomberg TV’s Annemarie Gordern if Trump has definitely removed the issue of Ukraine’s accession to NATO from the negotiating table. Rutte answered “yes” and nodded in the affirmative when pressed.

The issue of NATO constantly expanding right up to Russia’s borders, which especially ramped up in the mid-2000s during the Bush era, has been consistently identified by President Putin as a key motive in his ordering hundreds of thousands of Russian troops into Ukraine in February of 2022.

Russia sees this as a continuation of a war in Donbass that was already burning since 2014, which saw CIA and Western intelligence assist Kiev in seeking to push back Russian influence. But the reality has always been that natives on the Donbass are overwhelmingly Russian-speaking and pro-Moscow.

Rutte’s predecessor Jens Stoltenberg made a bombshell admission in a televised 2023 speech stating that the bloc’s refusal to stop expanding east as a key reason for why the Ukraine war started.

“President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement,” Stoltenberg said at the time. “That was what he sent us. And [that] was a precondition for not invade [sic] Ukraine. Of course we didn’t sign that.”

Previous to those words, this was considered a ‘pro-Kremlin talking point’. NATO chief Stoltenberg had even emphasized in the remarks that Putin “went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders.”

But apparently no lessons have been learned, and mainstream Western media has still by and large failed to feature the Stoltenberg admission as part of the narrative on the build-up to war.

As for Rutte, he explained in the new Friday Bloomberg TV interview Europe could normalize ties with Russia when the war is over. “It’s normal if the war would have stopped for Europe somehow, step by step, and also for the US, step by step, to restore normal relations with Russia,” he stated.

Keep reading

Record dropouts in Bundeswehr as delusional EU/NATO still mulls going to Ukraine

It’s no secret that Western militaries have suffered from poor recruitment for years. Virtually all EU/NATO members have this problem and there are no signs it will go away any time soon. Worse yet, they are now faced with record dropout rates, which is threatening the integrity of their armed forces. Despite all this and for some inexplicable reason, the EU/NATO still wants to pick a fight with Russia, a “noble democratic endeavor” that would require many times more troops. However, as previously mentioned, their ability to even retain (let alone attract) soldiers remains highly questionable. Namely, the latest reports confirm that 25% of new recruits in the German Bundeswehr drop out after only six months of service.

According to Financial Times, personnel shortages are “pushing troops to a breaking point”. The report cites Eva Högl, the Commissioner for the Armed Forces (Bundeswehr) in the German Parliament (Bundestag), who pointed out that “despite some success in recruitment, poor   meant that the armed forces had come no closer to meeting their target of having 203,000 soldiers by 2031”. As a result, this number dropped to just over 181,000. FT laments that “this comes at a time when Germany is pledging to do more to bolster Europe’s own defenses in the face of a potential US retreat from the continent”. It should be noted that Washington DC has anywhere between 50,000 and 84,000 troops deployed in Europe.

It’s virtually impossible to imagine Bundeswehr being able to deploy even 10% of that outside of Germany. Worse yet, while US soldiers are often very young (teenagers or in their early 20s), the Bundeswehr is “shrinking and getting older”, as Högl pointed out. In her annual report on the state of the German military, she lamented that “the average age had risen to 34 years — up from 33.1 years in 2021”.

“This development must be stopped and reversed as a matter of urgency”, she stated, adding: “I said the troops are challenged, but they are also very overburdened. I’ll go as far as to say they’re at breaking point. When we look at where our Bundeswehr is needed — for national defense, [NATO] alliance defense, international crisis management — it is a lot. And it really is at the limit.”

Keep reading

Is This the Beginning or the End of a New Cold War?

When European Union leaders met in Brussels on February 6th to discuss the war in Ukraine, French President Emmanuel Macron called this time “a turning point in history.” Western leaders agree that this is an historic moment when decisive action is needed, but what kind of action depends on their interpretation of the nature of this moment.

Is this the beginning of a new Cold War between the U.S., NATO and Russia or the end of one? Will Russia and the West remain implacable enemies for the foreseeable future, with a new iron curtain between them through what was once the heart of Ukraine? Or can the United States and Russia resolve the disputes and hostility that led to this war in the first place, so as to leave Ukraine with a stable and lasting peace?

Some European leaders see this moment as the beginning of a long struggle with Russia, akin to the beginning of the Cold War in 1946, when Winston Churchill warned that “an iron curtain has descended” across Europe.

On March 2nd, echoing Churchill, European Council President Ursula von der Leyen declared that Europe must turn Ukraine into a “steel porcupine.” President Zelenskyy has said he wants up to 200,000 European troops on the eventual ceasefire line between Russia and Ukraine to “guarantee” any peace agreement, and insists that the United States must provide a “backstop,” meaning a commitment to send U.S. forces to fight in Ukraine if war breaks out again.

Russia has repeatedly said it won’t agree to NATO forces being based in Ukraine under any guise. “We explained today that the appearance of armed forces from the same NATO countries, but under a false flag, under the flag of the European Union or under national flags, does not change anything in this regard,” Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on February 18. “Of course this is unacceptable to us.”

But the U.K. is persisting in a campaign to recruit a “coalition of the willing,” the same term the U.S. and U.K. coined for the list of countries they persuaded to support the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003. In that case, only Australia, Denmark and Poland took small parts in the invasion, Costa Rica publicly insisted on being removed from the list, and the term was widely lampooned as the “coalition of the billing” because the U.S. recruited so many countries to join it by promising them lucrative foreign aid deals.

Keep reading

Expect a NATO false flag attack to drag America into a global world war – If Europe wants world war III against Russia, let them be the ones to pay for it and fight it

Liberal pundits, along with warhawk RINOs (Republicans In Name Only), and European leaders all clutched their pearls and got out the fainting couches after President Trump told Zelenskyy he was risking “World War III,” yet the war between Russia and Ukraine has already involved multiple countries, whether they put boots on the ground or not.

Many liken the war in Ukraine to the one being waged in Israel, but the differences are like night and day, because only one of those two have the potential to ignite a literal world war, which makes comparisons like comparing apples to oranges, making it a false equivalent.

When the Biden regime allowed Ukraine to use U.S. manufactured missiles to hit inside of Russia, the U.S. became a direct participant in the Russia-Ukraine war, against a nation, Russia, who has the capabilities to directly attack America  and/or American interests, or military bases throughout Europe.

Europe on the other hand has been preparing for war with Russia, not out of fear that Russia would attack them when finished with Ukraine, as they claim, but rather because war is money, and European nations are facing failing economies.

We have argued here at ANP that the world is already seeing the beginning of WWIII, because unlike WWII or WWI, the technology exists to become active participants in a war without having military boots on the ground.

We see President Trump taking the stance that Ukraine be willing to talk about a cease-fire and peace talks, or withdrawing U.S. support, to which the majority of Americans think we have spent far too much on Ukraine while Americans are suffering high prices from Biden’s four years, massive credit card debt, and food prices that are making it hard to feed their families.

Now, parts of Europe are saying they are prepared to put their military on the ground in Ukraine to fight against Russia, which would escalate a war that would have been over years ago had nations like the U.S., and other NATO state members, simply minded their own business.

Keep reading

Europe is Falling & Needs War with Russia

Legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong is back with a new warning about war coming to Europe.  You may have seen the heated exchange between President Trump and President Zelensky of Ukraine on Friday.  If not, you should.  Some of the Trump highlights are:  “President Zelensky is not ready for peace. . . (Zelensky is) gambling with WWIII, and You either make a deal or we are out.”  It looks like Zelensky intentionally started a fight with Trump in the White House.  It also looks like every country in Europe is backing more war in Ukraine. And now, there is renewed talk of an EU army.  Armstrong says, “Why?  Because they all are facing the collapse of the European Union.  The debt is just unbelievable.  They never consolidated.  Between Covid, Climate Change and sanctions on Russia, the German economy has shrunk . . . 3% to 5%.  The economic growth (of the EU) is appalling.  Europe is falling, and this is why they need war.  So, they are backing Zelensky.”

In a new report released yesterday, Armstrong lays out the case why war in Europe is coming and coming soon.  Armstrong points out, “In this report, I gathered a bunch of headlines:  London Financial Times, what’s the headline?  ‘America is Now the Enemy of the West.’ This is why Trump is saying ‘We are out.’  Zelensky has admitted that 58% of the $350 billion the US gave him is missing.  You cut the funding, and you are going to find out the truth.  Trump should cut every single penny.  Bring it all out.  Zelensky is counting on Europe to replace the United States.  This is why he’s so arrogant. . . . Trump should get the hell out of NATO–ASAP.”

So, why are all these reports coming out in the last few months about gold coming to America from Europe?  Armstrong says, “Last week, I was on the phone, and I can’t tell you how much, but when you are about to go into war, capital moves. . . . Right now, I am concerned from about May 15th on. . . . Our computer (Socrates) says Europe is going into war, and I put it into this report, Europe will lose. . . . This is why the gold is coming to America.”

Keep reading

EU/NATO Keeps Poking the Bear, Still Wants Troops in Ukraine

UK Prime Minister Kier Starmer is looking to pitch the plan to Donald Trump, masking it under the “readiness to deploy British troops as a security guarantee for a free, sovereign and democratic Ukraine”. However, as Moscow is perfectly clear that it won’t tolerate any NATO occupation forces, this proposal makes no sense – unless Starmer is trying everything in his power to sabotage an actual peace deal, just like Boris Johnson did back in 2022.

As the strategic irrelevance of the dying European Union becomes more evident with every passing day, the troubled bloc is desperate to remain relevant, posing as a “great power”. This is rather amusing to Russia, China and now even the United States under Donald Trump. All three superpowers realize that Europe’s place in the geopolitical constellation of global powers is that of a highly dysfunctional second-rate player with little actual leverage over anything (including its own fate).

Several countries in Eastern Europe (particularly Hungary and Slovakia) are refusing to bow down to the diktat of the bureaucratic dictatorship in Brussels, choosing to align themselves with the new Trump administration. Thus, it’s pretty clear that the EU cannot even control its Eastern European members which were never meant to be more than second or even third-class (neo)colonies.

The only regional power outside of the troubled bloc that supports it is the endemically (and pathologically) Russophobic United Kingdom. Namely, London is terrified of seeing Moscow reclaim strong positions in Europe, so it wants to make sure that the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict continues for as long as possible. It did something similar in former Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere around the world, including in Ukraine itself even before 2014.

The former colonial superpower has always been adamant that wars between tellurocracies are a must if thalassocraies are to survive, which is why it invested so much of its power projection into pushing countries like Germany against Russia, including during both world wars. The concept remains unchanged to this day, which explains the UK’s obsession with Russia.

Keep reading

U.S. NATO Funding Much Higher Than Official Contribution Data

President Trump has faced criticism for claiming that the U.S. accounts for over 70% of NATO’s funding. However, he is correct in his assertion. The official figures on U.S. funding for NATO typically only reflect direct contributions, which represent roughly 15%-20% of NATO’s budget. In reality, the U.S. provides a wide range of additional aid and support, significantly increasing its financial commitment to the alliance.

These contributions include U.S. military bases in Europe, Enhanced Forward Presence (EFP), defense and security assistance, infrastructure support, contributions to NATO missions and operations, strategic airlift and logistics, cybersecurity and intelligence support, ballistic missile defense (BMD) systems, research and development (R&D) for NATO technologies, support for NATO’s nuclear deterrence, troop deployment costs, investment in NATO’s rapid reaction force, space applications, military aid and loans to smaller countries, and nuclear sharing.

By some estimates, when all U.S. contributions are considered, the total could be as high as $700 billion annually.

In terms of NATO-led operations, the U.S. is the largest contributor, covering the majority of personnel, equipment, and logistics costs for missions in Afghanistan, Libya, and Kosovo. Furthermore, the U.S. invests heavily in defense projects that bolster NATO’s collective defense capabilities, including missile defense systems in Europe, cyber defense initiatives, and advanced military technologies.

Keep reading

Dictator Zelenskiy Continues To Goad Europe To War, Says He ‘Won’t Take NATO Membership Off The Table’, Says Ukrainians Don’t Want Elections

The fact is Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is not a legitimate leader. He has overstayed his electoral mandate for a year. The parliament is not legitimate either.

Zelenskiy will not hold elections because he does not want to lose power, or should we say those who are controlling him do not want to lose power over the war against Russia, and the backroom deals that have been made for natural resources. Zelenskiy also does not want an investigation into the level of obscene grift of Western aid.

Saying Ukrainians do not want an election is a lie. He is extremely unpopular in-country. Much of this animosity towards the Ukrainian President comes from his attacks against Christianity and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

Keep reading