The North Atlantic Treaty Organization poses a threat to its members by involving them in interventions based on pretty flimsy evidence, Patrick Armstrong, former political counselor at the Canadian Embassy in Moscow told RT.
The new NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has made his first policy speech.
RT: The face of NATO has changed. Is this a chance for the politics to change?
Patrick Armstrong: Let me suggest what Stoltenberg should have said if he wanted to show that NATO was seriously discussing events. He might have said, and this should have been on the agenda at the recent meeting: “Mr. Kerry, a year ago you were telling us that you were absolutely certain that the Syrian government was using chemical weapons and that we had go bomb it. Today you are now telling us that we should go bomb the people that last year we would have been supporting. Please explain, discuss.” We all saw the photos of the militia cavorting in the US embassy swimming-pool in Tripoli. “Was armed NATO’s intervention in Libya a good idea or bad idea? Discuss.” A month ago we learned that the Kosovo Liberation Army that we supported -indeed we gave the entire country to it 15 years ago – was in fact a pretty nasty, criminal organization. Discuss. In conclusion, Mr. Stoltenberg, that would seem to me that based on past practice, NATO’s interventions appears to have made things worse, have detracted from the security of its members, and were based on pretty flimsy evidence. Discuss that, Mr. General Secretary, rather than blithering on about how wonderful NATO is.
RT: Why exactly does NATO see Russia as a threat? And how is that possible when at the same time the alliance is announcing such a buildup?
PA: The latest sentiment coming out of NATO is that Russia is doing terrible things on NATO’s doorstep. And NATO’s doorstep keeps moving… Speaking as a member of the country that had a great deal to do with the creation of NATO, NATO is in fact a very great threat to the security of Canada let alone its other members and the rest of the world. It keeps getting us involved in these wars for reasons that turn out to be not as solid as we were told. Why Russia? I don’t know. Maybe NATO is about being anti-Russia.
RT: The new alliance leader claimed that NATO troops are leaving Afghanistan a more stable a secure place when statistic shows the exact opposite. Is this conscious denial of the situation?
PA: NATO lives in some weird fantasy world. It reminds me of the Warsaw Pact. At some level they must know that every word they say is a lie and yet they keep on saying that. I honestly don’t know what is going on. I supported NATO back in the days of the Cold War. But at the moment it is just this destructive like a juggernaut, this huge vehicle rolls on crushing, and smashing, and destroying.