NATO / USA empire news
Tricky Headlines / 6 April 2009
Chomsky: NATO should immediately disband -- by PressTV
NATO would be better off if it sought an "immediate disbandment", renowned American author and political analyst Professor Noam Chomsky says.
"If the question was .How ought NATO to develop?. the answer is .immediate disbandment.," Chomsky told Russia Today when asked about the alliance.s development in the future.
Chomsky said despite the costly maintenance of the US military, which spends half of the world.s military expenditure, and the financial crisis, President Barack Obama has shown no desire to limit the military spending.
"In reality there is little sign of change. You may have noticed that despite the financial crisis there is no serious attempt to limit US military spending since (Barack) Obama became president," he said.
"They may cancel some expensive high tech projects like purchase of the F22 fighter. You don.t need those sorts of planes for the sort of wars we have now."
Chomsky also slammed the previous US administration for concocting excuses which contributed to NATO.s survival.
The administration of George W. Bush "issued a defense strategy document that effectively said that the real threat was actually the advanced technological level of third world countries and the need to preserve the superiority of the US technological military industrial base.. So suddenly the original threat turns out to be a lie and it is business as usual for NATO."
The comments came ahead of the 60th NATO anniversary which marks its formation with the aim of providing collective defense for members.
The body.s defensive capability rose to utmost standards upon accepting the then-united West Germany in mid-1990s. Moscow dropped its objection to the accession in exchange for the alliance.s promise not to expand beyond Germany.s border and close to those of Russia.s.
In contravention of the pledge, however, the Bush administration threw its weight behind the membership bid of former Soviet Union states such as Georgia and Ukraine.
"The United States wants to recruit Eastern European nations to join NATO because they think they will be prepared to send soldiers to fight in those sorts of wars," Chomsky concluded.
OTAN alianza militar para una dominación global imperial estadounidense
A Swiss historian, specialised in contemporary history and international relations since 1945, Daniele Ganser teaches at the University of Basel. He has written a landmark book on the role played by the network of stay-behind armies, « NATO.s Secret Armies », which has been translated into several languages. His current research focuses on the so-called « war on terror » and peak oil. He has frequently been invited by the Swiss Parliament and Swiss television to share his expertise on matters of foreign policy and security.
Question: Professor Ganser, after more than 40 years of absence, France has fully reintegrated into NATO.s military command. General Charles de Gaulle had made the decision to withdraw his country from the organisation after World War 2 and at the start of the Cold War. The General had not protested so much against NATO itself, as against its domination by the United States. In other words, he refused to place French military forces under the orders of an American general. How do you explain France.s return to NATO, considering that it continues to be an instrument of US military domination ?
Professor Ganser: To me this is a sign that France, or at least President Sarkozy and the majority of the French parliament, have accepted the dominance of the United States in world affairs and in NATO in particular. I don.t know about the French population, whether they like this US dominance and are ready to accept such a subordinate position, but I know that the Swiss would not accept such a position. It all reminds me very much of that Asterix and Obelix story. Speaking in that metaphor, Sarkozy has now given up that little village and put it under Roman Command. The US very much tries to imitate Roman and Greek Power, look at the buildings in Washington, the White House or the Capitol. And the US wants Europeans to accept a subordinate role, not as equals. French and German and Dutch soldiers in Afghanistan therefore have to fight under US Command. It has always been the case that NATO was dominated by the US, also during the time when the French were not part of the military command. If you look at NATO.s history, you see clearly that the Supreme Allied Commander Europe, the SACEUR, who is the highest ranking NATO officer in Europe, has always been an American General. NATO is run and commanded by the Pentagon. If a country does not want to accept that it must leave NATO, it.s as simple as that.
Question: Not so long ago, UN Secretary-General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, signed a protocol agreement with NATO authorising it to intervene just about everywhere in the world under the pretext of peace-keeping operations. In your opinion, for what reason does NATO wish to become the policeman of the world ?
Professor Ganser: During the Cold War NATO served the purpose to protect Western Europe in case of a Soviet invasion. Most people could understand this strategy; it made a lot of sense. The invasion did not come, and thus NATO never had to fight the Soviet Union, luckily. After the collapse of the USSR in 1991 NATO was left without a clear cut mission. Many said it should be closed down, and indeed I agree that this would have been the best thing to do. But instead, NATO was enlarged; Poland, Rumania and many other countries became members. Despite the fact that NATO had promised to Gorbachev and Yeltsin that it would never take on former Warsaw pact countries as new members.
So NATO broke its word, and the Russians feel encircled by NATO, this does not help to promote peace and understanding in Europe, because Europe is dependent on Russian oil and gas, and to provoke the Russian bear by enlarging NATO has been a very dangerous game to say the least, a game which helped the US, but damaged EU Russian relations. Furthermore NATO bombed Kosovo in 1999, with no mandate of the UN Security Council, so this was an illegal war of aggression. And after 9/11 NATO activated clause 5, saying that not only the US but all NATO countries were at war, and attacked Afghanistan in October 2001.
So you see, NATO has gone through a very radical transformation after the end of the Cold War. But regardless of what Ban Ki-Moon said, people wonder what the job of NATO is today? More and more people realise that NATO has become a tool in the global struggle for energy. In Afghanistan contacts have been signed to build a pipeline from the Caspian through Turkmenistan and Afghanistan to Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. So really I think the Afghan war is a pipeline war. The Taliban were flown to the US in the 1990s to debate about the pipeline with Unocal, but they could not reach a deal. Then came 9/11 and everybody said it.s the most important thing to capture Osama Bin Laden. Today it does not seem to be so important anymore. But energy security, pipelines and the control of transport routes in the Gulf of Aden are key issues.
Question: In your book « NATO.s Secret Armies » you make a strong case to the effect that, in the past, NATO had been involved in State terrorism, by way of an underground struggle and other covert actions targeting specific ideologies or countries for geopolitical reasons. Do you think that NATO is pursuing the same strategy and/or continues to engage in similar type of actions.
Professor Ganser: During the cold war NATO was running secret armies, so called stay-behind armies, in all countries in Western Europe. That.s the so called Gladio affair. NATO never wanted to comment on this secret strategy. We now know that the CIA and MI6 helped NATO to set up the secret armies, and that some of these secret armies linked up with right wing extremists, former Nazis and Neo fascists, who carried out terrorist attacks in European countries. So this is a highly sensitive affair. The parliament of the EU wrote a letter to NATO and protested in late 1990, when the Gladio affair became known and asked for a detailed investigation. But NATO refused to comment. So you see, NATO is not a transparent structure, not in the Cold War and not today. So of course it is possible that secret operations continue, without that the public is informed.
Question: In conclusion, does NATO represent an instrument of sovereignty or of domination for Europe ?
NATO is clearly an instrument to dominate Europe, because the US is in charge. If you look at all attempts of the last 15 years of the EU countries to establish a EU defence policy which is independent of NATO and the US, you will see that Washington protested each time with a vengeance, an independent EU Defence Structue is not something which the Pentagon wants.
NATO USA murders civilians in Pipelinistan
Daud Khattakin and Christina Lamb
AMERICAN drone attacks on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan are causing a massive humanitarian emergency, Pakistani officials claimed after a new attack yesterday killed 13 people.
The dead and injured included foreign militants, but women and children were also killed when two missiles hit a house in the village of Data Khel, near the Afghan border, according to local officials.
As many as 1m people have fled their homes in the Tribal Areas to escape attacks by the unmanned spy planes as well as bombings by the Pakistani army. In Bajaur agency entire villages have been flattened by Pakistani troops under growing American pressure to act against Al-Qaeda militants, who have made the area their base.
Kacha Garhi is one of 11 tented camps across Pakistan.s frontier province once used by Afghan refugees and now inhabited by hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis made homeless in their own land.
So far 546,000 have registered as internally displaced people (IDPs) according to figures provided by Rabia Ali, spokesman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and Maqbool Shah Roghani, administrator for IDPs at the Commission for Afghan Refugees.
The commissioner.s office says there are thousands more unregistered people who have taken refuge with relatives and friends or who are in rented accommodation.
Jamil Amjad, the commissioner in charge of the refugees, says the government is running short of resources to feed and shelter such large numbers. A fortnight ago two refugees were killed and six injured in clashes with police during protests over shortages of water, food and tents.
On the road outside Kacha Garhi camp, eight-year-old Zafarullah and his little brother are among a number of children begging for coins and scraps. .I want to go back to my village and school,. he said.
With the attacks increasing, refugees have little hope of returning home and conditions in the camps will worsen as summer approaches and the temperatures soar.
Many have terrible stories. Baksha Zeb lost everything when his village, Anayat Kalay in Bajaur, was demolished by Pakistani forces. His eight-year-old son is a kidney patient needing dialysis and he has been left with no means to pay.
.Our houses have been flattened, our cattle killed and our farms and crops destroyed,. he complained. .There is not a single structure in my village still standing. There is no way we can go back..
He sold his taxi to pay for food for his family and treatment for his son but the money has almost run out. .God bestowed me with a son after 15 years of marriage,. he said. .Now I have no job and I don.t know how we will survive..
Pakistani forces say they have killed 1,500 militants since launching antiTaliban operations in Bajaur in August. Locals who fled claim that only civilians were killed.
Zeb said he saw dozens of his friends and relatives killed. Villagers were forced to leave bodies unburied as they fled.
Pakistani officials say drone attacks have been stepped up since President Barack Obama took office in Washington, killing at least 81 people. A suicide attacker blew himself up inside a paramilitary base in Islamabad, killing six soldiers and wounding five yesterday.Stumble It!