At the 30th NATO summit, following the U.S. and Russia’s withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, NATO leaders, reiterating future threats, divided the world into East and West military poles.

NATO, while stating a security strategy, continued to regard Russia as a threat to the security of Atlantic and euro area, just like it was during the Cold War. The organization also claimed that cyber operations, terrorist acts and those effective state and non-state actors that are not aligned, should be confronted as factors that have challenged the world order. 

NATO’s strategy has shifted from the level of security concerns over Russia and global challenges to the level of preparedness for possible military confrontation. NATO seeks to provide the ground and facilities for further deterrence, faster defense and increased capacities of the rapid reaction forces to counter possible attacks, especially in the field of terrorism and cyber-terrorism.

Although NATO, at a recent meeting, referred to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as a defensive coalition that does not threaten any country, its field of activity indicates that the nature of the treaty is tied to war. 

NATO achievement and threats to Europe

NATO plays a key role in creating armed democracy in Europe, and is also a serious threat to the continent’s security.

After the end of WWII, when capitalism and communism were two dominant ideologies in international relations, the U.S., with a greed for Europe’s scientific and industrial resources, entered the green continent that was tired of devastating wars. With the Marshal Plan, the U.S. chose Europe as its strategic ally to confront the Soviet Union.

Constant security is the condition for strategic partnership. Therefore, beside the Marshal Plan, only NATO-backed armed democracy could guarantee constant security for long-term strategic partnership between the U.S. and Europe. 

By dictating this kind of democracy to Europe in the form of preserving values and mutual interests, the U.S. has taught European leaders and nations to stop fighting each other and join the U.S. to achieve global goals and counter communism. 

By its policy, the U.S. strategic goal was to promote public knowledge in Europe. It also sought to support those policies and organizations that, on the one hand, could guarantee peace and security in Europe, and on the other persuade European nations to cooperate with the U.S. at international and trans-national level, in the context of a new order after the World War II. 

In the process of reinforcing NATO, democracy expanded alongside NATO’s military goals in leftist Europe. European people slowly became familiar with ballot boxes, and, by benefiting from common interests in the economic system of capitalism and neo-liberalism, they agreed with the arms race with the Soviet communist system. Therefore, a great miracle happened in transatlantic relations and developments, and yesterday’s enemies became today’s friends and strategic partners.

In fact, armed democracy was NATO achievement for European countries. The democracy has so far worked out very well, to the point that the cruel and criminal European countries now present themselves great supporters of human rights and environment!

Leninism and Stalinism, racism, fascism, apartheid, genocide, crematoria and cruel killings during Africa and India’s colonization, appalling events in WWI and WWII, brutal killings in Srebrenica and Bosnia are only a small part of Europe’s history.

After WWII, Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg signed the Brussels Pact in 1984 and formed the Western Union Defense Organization (WUDO) in response to German threats and expansionism by the Soviet Union in eastern and central European countries. 

The U.S. government, which had won the approval of the Congress to accept military commitments outside its borders in response to the Soviet intervention in the Czech coup, joined the Brussels Pact along with Canada on April 4, 1949. Finally, the U.S. and 11 European countries founded the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Washington against Russia and Germany.

Following France’s defeat in the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in Vietnam, the Soviet Union, which considered Germany as its enemy, seized the opportunity and offered Collective Security Treaty to the U.S., Britain and France in 1954, and requested NATO membership, which was rejected by all three countries. 

A few months after NATO's negative response, due to its hostility with Russia, NATO accepted Italy’s membership on April 4, 1949, and Germany’s on May 9, 1955, in order to prevent Moscow from taking advantage of European political and security conflicts.  

With Germany joining NATO, the Soviet Union established the Warsaw Pact five days later, using the military facilities of Eastern European countries, which practically triggered the Cold War.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, during the presidency of Boris Yeltsin, Moscow sent a letter to NATO secretary-general on December 21, 1991, asking for membership in the military bloc, which once again rejected by NATO.

 Constant security, an achievement of constant threat

The serious threat to Europe's constant security is to be examined as European countries have not played an important role in maintaining and establishing durable security over the last half a century, but they reached such level of security due to the security interests created by the U.S. and NATO. 

Since the Cold War, European countries have been the victims of possible nuclear conflict between the U.S. and Russia. Therefore, given the U.S. and Russian withdrawal from the INF Treaty and stationing new nuclear missiles by these countries in the green continent, Western Europe will be once again the first victim and target in a possible U.S.-Russian conflict.

In other words, the security of European countries is provided and guaranteed in the absence of the U.S.-Russian conflict, which is a constant threat at the same time of being constant security. 

In the wake of widespread commitments to NATO, coupled with transatlantic relations, without NATO’s support, most European states are vulnerable in the face of Russian military power due to the lack of a professional army.

In case European countries distance themselves from the U.S., even if they spend a sum more than their defense expenditures within NATO, they will not be able to form an army with deterrence capability.

In fact, European states have strategic partnerships in the context of governments and interdependencies. According to history, European nations certainly will not be friends, if not enemies.

It is nearly five decades that Europe has been trying to form an independent army to defend itself, but political disputes between European countries have prevented it from being realized. This is a pain that Europe always suffers from.