Why must NATO continue to expand eastward just to completely defeat Russia? This time, the French presidential candidate defied power and rarely spoke the truth, hitting the vital point of the United States. Is the split of NATO inevitable?
As several Russian army groups besieging Kiev withdrew northward and rushed thousands of miles to the Donbass area, NATO's courage began to gradually increase. Recently, according to foreign media reports, NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg said in a public interview that NATO will undergo a "fundamental change." In order to prevent Russia's "invasion" and demonstrate its determination to defend itself, NATO will seek to permanently station troops on the Russian border to prevent Russia from acting rashly. Stoltenberg's remarks also directly illustrate one thing, that is, NATO's eastward expansion has become unstoppable. In order to continue to expand NATO's influence, at the recent NATO Foreign Ministers' Summit, Stoltenberg took the initiative to send invitations to Sweden and Finland, hoping that they could join the NATO military group and contribute to the maintenance of Europe. Make our own contributions and efforts to ensure the stability and peace of the situation.
Because of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Finland and Sweden are considering whether to abandon their decades-long military non-aligned " neutral country " status and join NATO. The leaders of these two Nordic countries have previously stated that Russia's " Ukraine " "The invasion" has changed the "entire security landscape" in Europe, so they must also consider their own country's defense security. For now, joining NATO seems to be the best option for Finland and Sweden. Regarding this news, Medvedev, deputy chairman of the Russian National Security Council, said that if the two Nordic countries join the US-led military alliance, all Russian forces in the region will be strengthened. In other words, Russia will begin to strengthen its military deployment in the Kaliningrad area. Russia has previously publicly stated that if Finland and Sweden join NATO, it will also mean that nuclear weapons will appear in the region, and the Russian military will be forced to strengthen its defense in the Baltic Sea, that is, to store nuclear weapons.
In fact, if Sweden and Finland successfully join NATO, then the purpose of NATO's eastward expansion will be considered achieved. But this is a violation of the commitments made to Russia: will not continue to "expand eastward" and will not deploy combat troops around Russia. According to analysts, once Sweden and Finland join NATO, the United States will not only be able to deploy nuclear weapons to threaten Russia and squeeze Russia's strategic living space, but it can also deploy the anti-missile system within its territory to weaken Russia. Strategic nuclear deterrence capability, kills two birds with one stone, even if it breaks its promise. Compared to Ukraine, which is at war with Russia, NATO member states would definitely welcome Finland and Sweden, which are stronger and less threatening, to join. If Ukraine is defeated in this conflict, the four Eastern European countries will face the Russian military front, and they will become NATO's main bridgehead against Russia. It would be best if Finland and Sweden could attract firepower.
Of course, there are many objections within NATO to NATO's eastward expansion, and they believe that there is no need to provoke Russia. From a historical perspective, NATO's eastward expansion is a completely failed strategy, or it may be said that it was deceived by the United States. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was established to fight against the Soviet Union. Under British Prime Minister Churchill Iron Curtain Speech and U.S. President Truman 's Cold War Declaration, Western European countries formed a military alliance with the United States to jointly deal with Soviet power. Expansion of scope. However, in the early 1990s, after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the United States promoted a wave of "Russian threat theory" in order to pursue Russia and wanted the disintegration of the Soviet Union to happen again to the Russian Federation. NATO's first eastward expansion was achieved.While Russia was embracing the West, NATO took the opportunity to expand eastward several times in a row. After entering the 21st century, the expansion of NATO to Russia's doorstep made the old NATO members realize that something was wrong, because they would directly face Russia.
Military experts said that because of NATO’s special mechanism, NATO member states must not only support and defend each other, but also ensure the improvement of military strength among member states. This also means that old NATO members such as France, Germany and Italy not only To ensure the security of these member states, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, funds must be provided to help them modernize and upgrade their equipment. This thankless task will obviously not be supported by the old member states. French President Macron has publicly stated that NATO is "brain dead" because it has no meaning in continuing to exist. Candidate Le Pen, who is running against Macron for the French presidency, even publicly told the truth a few days ago, "I think France should leave the NATO Allied Forces Headquarters because NATO was created to fight the Soviet Union. Today, the Soviet Union does not Existence. " This actually directly explains the embarrassing situation of NATO today. The Soviet Union is no longer there. Why does NATO continue to exist? Is it acting as the "private army" of the United States?
Therefore, the most vocal presidential candidate in France said that once is elected, she will immediately start work related to promoting France's withdrawal from NATO. This also means that if Le Pen becomes the president of France, not only will the political situation in Europe undergo tremendous changes, but the entire NATO military group will also fall apart. France's withdrawal is likely to become a trigger, and by then it will be rampant. The military group that has lasted for more than half a century is very likely to come to an end. By that time, I wonder how long the United States can continue to run rampant without the flag-waving voice of NATO?
