70th Anniversary of the Founding of NATO

No to NATO! Dismantle NATO!
Make Canada a Zone for Peace!

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has always described itself as a defensive alliance. It is an aggressive military-political alliance conceived and brought into being on April 4, 1949 during the Cold War, on the pretext of defending Europe against "communist invasion" and the claim that the communist "evil" and totalitarianism were a threat to Western freedom and democracy.

Since the collapse of the former Soviet Union and people's democracies in eastern Europe, NATO has been enlarged to incorporate some of the former people's democracies. With its original raison d'être having disappeared, new claims have been presented in an attempt to justify its continued existence. In 1991, NATO heads of state declared that while the Soviet threat had "been removed … and thus no longer provides a focus for Allied strategy," "the risks to Allied security that remain are multi-faceted in nature and multi-directional, which makes them hard to predict and access."[1]

Ten years later, 9/11 provided NATO with a new rationale and a new focus of fighting "terrorism." Today, its raison d'être is again being recast: the latest danger is said to be from "authoritarian" and "rogue states" threatening "freedom" and seeking to overthrow liberal democracy and the "rules-based international order" it claims to uphold.

Map of current NATO member countries by year of joining.

The first Secretary General of NATO, Lord Ismay, stated that the main purpose of the Atlantic Alliance in Europe was "to keep the Americans in, the Russians out, and the Germans down."[2] Today, while NATO is used to fight a multi-dimensional global war on several fronts utilizing its own forces as well as proxy forces as "agents of chaos," Europe is still plagued by the spectre of  war as the contradictions within the ranks of the big European powers and between these powers and the U.S. and within the ranks of the U.S. imperialists themselves continue to sharpen over who will control Europe and dominate Asia. This ignores that the peoples of Asia, as well as Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, are in no mood to be dominated. Nonetheless, as each big power strives for a bigger share of the spoils of war, the rules are changing. U.S. President Donald Trump does not favour negotiations with members countries and instead threatens to leave NATO if he doesn't get his way, at the moment meaning that other members must significantly increase their military budgets. Meanwhile, the European powers are consolidating their own defence forces and divisions are expressed within the ranks of NATO itself and within each NATO country, including the United States, over the role NATO should play today. Its enlargement has failed to mitigate or resolve the contradictions in its ranks as each big power pursues narrow private interests which defy the NATO concept of collective security.

Today, the wars in which the U.S. imperialists and NATO members are engaged in are no longer a form of politics by other means because these powers no longer pursue the interests of even their own polities. They engage in nation-wrecking, not nation-building, and are no longer guided by an aim to serve what was called the public good in any way. They have abandoned the UN Charter and international rule of law which upholds the equality of nations big or small, their right to self-determination and the principle of non-interference in their internal affairs. Today the aim of wars of aggression and occupation is to destroy those countries that refuse to submit to the dictate of the U.S. imperialists and their allies. These are wars of destruction and, because there are no politics, there are no negotiations of peace treaties which bring with them obligations and accountability. From U.S./NATO intervention in the Balkans in 1999 where a humanitarian pretext was used to bomb Yugoslavia, to the Gulf Wars, and wars against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and other countries, nothing has been sorted out. Now they are pursuing the same against Venezuela.

In this regard, membership in NATO affects not only military matters but all aspects of the national state and the political life of the country. Through its Office of Public Diplomacy and other means, NATO pays first-rate attention to the political manipulation of parliaments, information warfare and the wrecking of public opinion. It works in conjunction with governments, including Canada's. It has always had a hand in formulating the political structures which are to be permitted in not only Europe, the United States and Canada but, since the collapse of the former Soviet Union and former peoples' democracies, in all countries which are deemed to be liberal democracies or "on the road to democracy" as in the case of Ukraine. Any country which refuses to submit is subject to regime change by the NATO bloc.

One need not be a pacifist to be deeply concerned about a foreign and defence policy that is governed by U.S./NATO and invests everything in rapid deployment forces that are not designed to defend one's own country. No sooner was NATO launched in 1949 than people began demanding Canada's withdrawal and an independent foreign policy, advancing a variety of perspectives on why that was necessary. There was broad opposition amongst Canadians to nuclear weapons on Canadian soil in both the 1960s and 1980s, with rallies and other actions across the country. This has continued to date in Canadian ports against the "visits" of U.S. and NATO nuclear warships while the peoples of the Arctic continue to demand that it be a zone for peace.

Protest against visit of warship to Port of Montreal, October 30, 2004.

Canada provides millions of tax dollars and personnel to NATO and U.S. "democracy promotion" agencies to organize coups and "colour revolutions." Since 2005, Canada has sponsored and operated the NATO Information Center in Kiev under the NATO Office of Public Diplomacy. In addition to organizing military integration of the armed forces of Ukraine into NATO and exporting armaments, Canada was involved in the creation of a ramified network of as many as 50 local pro-NATO information offices in Ukraine, many based in universities. This network was organized to combat the opposition of the Ukrainian people to joining NATO and specifically the "visits" of U.S. and NATO warships to Crimea and the Black Sea ports, and to plans to isolate Russia and failing cooperation bring about regime change by the NATO bloc. From 2007, NATO’s Information Center has co-sponsored the Kiev Security Forum of the Open Ukraine Foundation of Arseniy Yatsenyuk (appointed prime minister immediately after the February 2014 coup d’état), on which the Halifax International Security Forum, initiated in 2009 and organized by the same U.S. personnel, is modelled.

The cartel party system in Canada ensures that Canada's membership in NATO is a fait accompli and part of "business as usual." At no time do the parties in Parliament question a conception of sovereignty where decision-making about the crucial issues of war and peace is in foreign hands. In fact, no public debate or discussion worthy of the name on membership in NATO has ever been held in the Canadian Parliament. In 1949 at the time NATO was founded, any MP who stood for peaceful co-existence with the then-Soviet Union was either removed, sanctioned or absent during the vote in the Parliament. Today's assertion that membership in NATO be declared a "Canadian value" is not questioned by the political parties which form governments or have seats in the Parliament. Any discussion on this is taboo. No matter what reviews of Canada's foreign policy are conducted by the official circles, parliamentary standing committees or the monopoly media, questioning Canada's membership in NATO is taboo. This being the case, discussions amongst the people are treated as "fringe" and "extremist." Enforcing this outlook is not only an assault on their conscience but disinformation to make sure no collective consciousness can emerge which translates into taking Canada out of NATO, demanding that NATO be dismantled and making Canada a Zone for Peace.

Not only is Canada's membership in NATO an assault on the people's sovereignty because a foreign power decides all matters related to war and peace on behalf of the people, but even Parliament does not have a say over matters of war and peace because they are matters of executive privilege and/or Royal Prerogative. For example, the United States secretly deployed nuclear bombs in 27 countries and territories during the Cold War, including Canada. The agreements were known only by the Prime Minister and a handful of selected cabinet ministers. On August 28, 1950 -- using the Royal Prerogative -- Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent secretly agreed to the storage of 11 atomic bombs at Goose Bay, Labrador, the closest U.S. nuclear storage site to Europe. According to the secret history of the Security Section of the 43rd Bombardment Wing, cited by Professor John Clearwater in his Canadian Nuclear Weapons: The Untold Story of Canada's Cold War Arsenal, "Units were stored in a forest, on gravel roads, approximately four miles from the base proper."

Then on August 17, 1963 the Pearson Liberal government agreed to station 500 or more U.S. nuclear warheads in Canada. Professor Clearwater notes that Ottawa said as little as possible about its nuclear weaponry -- partly because of fear that it would be criticized for being part of the Pentagon war machine. The aim was to marginalize the opposition of the Canadian people to the use of Canadian territory for imperialist war preparations, the hosting of U.S. military personnel on Canadian bases and soil, and to the presence of weapons of mass destruction. In other words, the existence of the Royal Prerogative and its use to enforce what cannot be justified is as great a political problem as banning weapons of mass destruction.

Another front of NATO's aggressive focus today involves cyber warfare, information warfare and "election meddling." The changes to the Canada Elections Act contained in Bill C-76 that relate to combatting "foreign influence" and monitoring the use of social media are informed by U.S. National Security Doctrine, NATO and its Atlantic Council think tank as well as the Five Eyes intelligence agencies. These organs represent the interests of trans-Atlantic corporate and financial interests and the foreign policy elite within the United States and Europe. The NATO Association of Canada, for its part, is involved in the behind-the-scenes changes being made to Canada's electoral system and its electoral laws involving the control and regulation of electoral and political communication. In the name of protecting electors, a form of censorship is introduced to determine what is legitimate. In social media, this affects, for example, those it decrees to be "true believers," i.e. those who, in the words of the intelligence agencies themselves, wittingly or unwittingly become the dupes of Russia, etc., and are thus legitimate targets of persecution. Social media corporations have taken actions against alternative websites known for being critical of U.S. and Canadian government foreign and domestic policies. These include Counterpunch, the World Socialist Website, Global Research, Consortium News, Mediamatters, Common Dreams, Democracy Now, Wikileaks, Truthout, The Intercept, VenezuelaAnalysis, teleSUR and others.

The peoples of the world fight to realize their aspiration for peace every day. All over the world, as they affirm their rights and fight for the rights of all, they translate their desire for peace, freedom and democracy -- hijacked at the time of NATO's founding -- into a political force which puts decision-making in their own hands. Taking up the demand to Make Canada a Zone for Peace is to occupy the space of change. In Canada, the demand to Make Canada a Zone for Peace is aimed, amongst other things, at making sure that Canada's foreign policy does not cause harm to other peoples as is presently the case.

Whether or not NATO survives in its present form, what is certain is that the peoples' striving for peace, freedom and democracy today is favoured by taking up the call to make their countries zones for peace and by uniting in action to establish anti-war governments which express a modern democratic personality which defends the rights of all as a matter of principle.

The strength of the people's striving for peace and the defence of the rights of all cannot be underestimated or downplayed. Attempts to smash this movement and deprive the people of a collective consciousness and action must be opposed. This includes waging the ideological struggle against attempts to portray military interventions abroad as being about "responsibility to protect," "peacemaking" and upholding a rules-based international order and other fairy tales.

The meetings, rallies and articles on the occasion of the 70th anniversary of NATO involve activists and experts from different backgrounds who take principled stands that the existence of NATO is incompatible with the desire of the people for a modern and humane conception of security based on defending the rights of all, for an independent foreign policy based on making Canada a zone for peace, and for nation-building on a modern basis.

On the occasion of the 70th anniversary of the founding of NATO, let us contribute to sorting out the issue of how to take Canada out of NATO and make sure NATO is dismantled. Most importantly, no matter which direction NATO now goes, let us contribute to making Canada a Zone for Peace.

Demonstrations in Canada in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s
Against NATO and Imperialist War Preparations

Demonstration outside NATO ministerial meeting in Ottawa in 1963.

Demonstration on Sparks Street in Ottawa, circa 1963, opposes the Pearson Liberal government's agreement to allow U.S. nuclear missiles on Canadian soil.


Protestors hold sit-in at the entrance to the Bomarc missile base in
La Macaza, Quebec, September 9, 1964.


Demonstration outside NATO ministerial meeting in Ottawa, 1974.

Demonstration in Vancouver against visiting U.S. warship, July 17, 1982, calls for Canada to get
out of NATO and NORAD.

Demonstration in Toronto, March 17, 1985 against Reagan's visit. In the mid 1980s actions took place in many cities, organized by CPC(M-L), against imperialist war preparations and U.S. dictate.

Demonstration in Guelph against Cruise missile testing, June 14, 1985, outside local MP's office.

Demonstration in Winnipeg, January 19, 1988, against Cruise Missile testing in Canada.

Notes

1. "The Alliance's New Strategic Concept," NATO, November 8, 1991.

(TML Weekly, March 30, 2019 - No. 11)

Return to Index on Ukraine

(To access articles individually click on the black headline.)

Website:  www.cpcml.ca   Email:  editor@cpcml.ca