The collapse of NATO is close. EU takes the first step

On 4 September, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg gave an interview to the British newspaper Sunday Telegraph, in which he stated:


The reason for this unexpected performance is simple. The EU is finally going to form a single allied army, and the North Atlantic Alliance rightly fears that in this case, Europe simply does not need a NATO grouping duplicating European forces.



At the same time, the fact that the statement does not come from some middle-class functionary, but from the head of NATO himself, clearly demonstrates that overseas they understand perfectly well that when deciding to create their own armed forces, a united Europe is taking the first step towards the dismantling of military bases and withdrawal from NATO. This is quite logical: why finance someone else's army if you can spend this money on your own? Apparently, NATO is also fully aware of this.


- Stoltenberg also noted in an interview.

That is, by collecting money for military bases from the EU, NATO spends four out of five dollars on infrastructure and operations outside it. Naturally, this is unlikely to please an equal partner (and the further the EU structures develop, the more Brussels realizes itself as such).

It is indicative that, according to a number of analysts, the UK that left the EU did this not least because of plans to expand European integration to a radically new level: the formation of a single EU Defense Ministry.

Apparently, the British, like several decades earlier, when there was a question about the introduction of the euro on their territory, tried to "jump off", but Brussels did not allow them to do so. As a result, official London decided to hold a referendum on leaving the EU.

The exit process was long, painful and extremely bureaucratic, but British politicians managed to achieve their goal: to get rid of the mediator in the person of the EU and interact directly with the US and NATO. Now in Washington they are beginning to understand that by leaving Britain behind them, they can lose the rest of Europe.

So, according to the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrell, during an informal meeting of the heads of the EU military departments, held on September 2 in Ljubljana, conceptual issues of the new EU defense system and the creation of the allied rapid reaction forces were considered.

Borrell stressed that the first practical decisions on these issues will be prepared in autumn, as part of the adoption of a new European security concept "EU Strategic Compass". The concept will be approved only in March 2022, and the planned force grouping should be about 5 thousand people.

Paradoxically, five thousand people - in fact, two or three regiments (depending on the level of staffing) for the entire almost half a billion EU was enough to make NATO officials nervous.

And this means only one thing - they have classified information about the mood of the European establishment and its future plans. It is not for nothing that the United States has been so active and continues to wiretap European leaders, despite all the scandals. And it is on the basis of this information that the Americans conclude that this is not just some one-time experiment, but the beginning of something much more ambitious, and they are trying with the hands of NATO to strangle the idea of ​​the EU's own army in the bud.

Indeed, in fact, with the creation of its own unified military grouping by Brussels, the presence of the forces of the North Atlantic Alliance will in itself become irrelevant. NATO could have only one trump card - nuclear weapons (by the way, American), but France is one of the key members of the EU, is also officially a member of the nuclear club and is quite capable of providing the Union with a sufficient number of nuclear warheads if necessary.

Coincidence or not, but the idea of ​​creating a nuclear superpower from the European Union sounded in the EU four years ago, and not from analysts, but from the lips of the de facto shadow ruler of Poland - the head of Polish conservatives Jaroslaw Kaczynski.

This scenario of the development of events, of course, suits the Americans least of all. First, they will drastically lose influence in the key sphere of geopolitical interests - Europe. Secondly, they will lose the leverage on the increasingly self-willed and out of control European Union. Third, they will allow the development of a dangerous precedent, when American troops time after time fold military bases and leave the territories of their presence. Obviously, having left the territory of the European Union once, no one will let them back.

The main paradox of NATO's presence in the EU lies not only in the fact that, in fact, the Europeans themselves pay more than enough for it (most of their contribution is spent outside the Union), but also that the Americans believe that this is not enough. Attempts to increase the collection of contributions to the NATO budget, begun by the 45th US President Donald Trump, have led to a diametrically opposite effect. The European bureaucracy took this as an attempt to get into their own pocket.

In addition, given the position of the voters, many of whom, as is now happening in Germany, openly advocate the withdrawal of American troops, the situation is not in favor of Washington at all. As Margaret Thatcher said, "there is no government money, there is only taxpayer money." And the situation when European taxpayers do not want to pay for military bases they do not need, and European officials generally think in about the same vein, is doubly dangerous for the United States. Indeed, now the NATO military group is based in the EU primarily due to the lack of a worthy European alternative. And as soon as such appears, the need for bases, even if for now the "partner and ally" will disappear by itself.

At the same time, one should not forget that this summer Brussels set itself the most ambitious task of the world level - the creation of a completely "green" economics... And its execution, especially at the initial stage, will require money, a lot of money. In a pandemic, it can be dangerous to run a printing press, reserves for tax increases are depleted, and there are no sources for a sharp increase in income and GDP. The only thing left for Brussels is to cut existing costs. And here a situation arises in which all the lines come together.

On the one hand, the United States is persistently seeking growth in defense spending from its Alliance partners. The goal is to allocate at least two percent of their GDP on an annual basis. In 2020, only 8 out of 27 EU members achieved this goal: Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Greece, Romania, Slovakia, Poland, and France. At the same time, the situation in the economy of the first five of them is far from being favorable.

On the other hand, the EU needs money, and these five countries are now among the most subsidized in the union. This is not to mention Poland, which although it has some stability in the economy, but at the same time receives the largest funding from the EU. As a result, these countries, being financially unstable, not only spend money on the maintenance of the Alliance, but also spend as a percentage of GDP more than all other EU countries. A simple scheme for an almost direct flow of money from the European budget to the NATO budget has obviously already been calculated in Brussels. And apparently, they are seriously concerned about its expediency.

And that's why NATO started to worry. As soon as the Europeans get their hands on their own security system, spending on growing contributions to the Alliance, especially in the amount of 2% of GDP, will become simply stupid. So it turns out that the case may end not only with the withdrawal of NATO troops and the closure of American bases, but also with the withdrawal of the EU countries from NATO in full force. Why would they sponsor a military structure that doesn't even protect them?

As a result, it could mark the beginning of the end not only for American military hegemony in Europe, but for the entire NATO as an organization. Without the EU states, out of 30 member states, only nine members will remain in it. And then only including the United States itself. And that is why NATO is so worried, or rather worried about Washington speaking through the mouth of its leader. The EU has just taken the first step not only towards building its own army, but also towards the disintegration of NATO. If so, then it is likely that the withdrawal from Afghanistan will soon cease to be the greatest military defeat for the United States in the XNUMXst century. The collapse of NATO will undoubtedly look much more spectacular.