End of NATO

There is talk of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, or NATO, coming to an end.

When the British electorate were holding discussions about withdrawal from the EU and some were crediting it with seventy years of peace in Europe, I was keen to re-attribute this achievement to NATO. Yet as Trumpist America seriously considers leaving the alliance, I wonder if its demise will be such a sad loss after all, despite its success in averting a third world war.

While wealthy member states such as Germany, Luxembourg, Denmark, Spain, Belgium, Holland and France repeatedly fail to meet military spending targets, European nations have clearly depended too much on America’s military might to defend their shores. This essentially equates to subsidised defence, with the US taxpayer paying to keep us safe. This has enabled Europeans to enjoy generous welfare budgets knowing that Uncle Sam will take care of their belligerent neighbours to the east. The American workforce is taxed so the French and Germans can enjoy longer holidays and earlier retirements. This is hardly fair. 

Furthermore, NATO’s policy of eastward expansion of its membership, from the 90s till 2024, which includes states bordering Russia, has surely done little to assure the Russians that the organisation’s motives are neutral and pacific. What began essentially as anti-Russian alliance has not only survived the end of the Cold War but expanded and consolidated itself in the meantime, which might made Mr Putin the paranoid and aggressive ruler he has become. NATO has become a self-fulfilling prophecy, presenting itself as the solution to Russian aggression, without admitting to also being one of the causes.

Thirdly, a less militaristic America might break the stranglehold which the 'Military-Industrial Complex' has on American politics. The federal government’s gigantic defence budget and its many operations, has seen a dangerous level of coordination between armament companies and national politicians. Any Congressman or Congresswoman who objects to defence spending soon finds that mysterious Political Action Groups are funding rival candidates in their districts during mid-term elections. Consequently, few US politicians are prepared to challenge military expansion. The end of NATO may go some way to reducing this.

Whatever eschatological implications, if any, this portends, I cannot see, but nation states should pay for their own defence, and not expect others to do it for them. NATO is not the pristine, whiter-that-white alliance I have admired all this time. Although I would be sorry to see it die, its dominance has not been entirely good for us. 

Image by Marek Studzinski from Pixabay