U.S. Plans to Increase Domination and Control Over Europe and Asia

Congress Resolution Calls for Use of NATO for More Intervention into Member States

– Kathleen Chandler –

In April, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution which calls on President Joe Biden to push "to strengthen democratic institutions within NATO member, partner, and aspirant countries." It spells out the direction the forces Biden represents have decided to go in to increase U.S. domination and control of Europe. Using talk of "democratic principles" NATO is to be further weaponized politically and militarily. Claims of "shared democratic values" will also be used to justify actions against Russia, China, and other countries in the Asia Pacific for purposes of U.S. domination.

Reaffirming "unequivocal support for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as an alliance founded on democratic principles," the resolution specifically calls on Biden to "use the voice and vote of the United States to adopt a new Strategic Concept for NATO that is clear about its support for shared democratic values and committed to enhancing NATO's capacity to strengthen democratic institutions within NATO member, partner, and aspirant countries" and "to use the voice and vote of the United States to establish a Center for Democratic Resilience within NATO headquarters." The next NATO Summit is scheduled to be held in Madrid, Spain, June 28-30.

While the resolution is non-binding and does not carry the weight of law, it has significance in speaking of NATO not only as a military alliance but, in the name of democracy, as a weapon to be used to interfere in the internal affairs of "NATO member, partner, and aspirant countries."[1]

Since its inception NATO has not just been a military alliance commanded by the United States but also a political weapon which made sure the countries of Western Europe would not fall under communist rule and would remain under U.S. domination. This has been a main role of the Atlantic Council, formed in 1961 and based in Washington, DC, for example. It "galvanizes U.S. global leadership and engagement in partnership with allies" and acts to shape "the global future together" in the interests of the U.S. The U.S., which already commands NATO militarily, will likely be the one to use this latest weapon to serve its interests, just as NATO expansion has, including keeping Germany and other European countries in check.

The resolution was also passed in the context of the current U.S./NATO-instigated conflict in Ukraine. It states, as Biden does, that Ukraine is "on the frontlines in the contest between democratic values and autocracy." This, even though before the conflict Ukraine was considered to have an eroding and "backsliding" democracy, with rampant corruption and repression of rights.

The passing of the resolution also speaks to the ongoing conflicts among U.S. rulers as to how to secure U.S. world domination, including the role for NATO. While commonly such resolutions pass by near unanimous votes, for this one 63 Republicans voted against, more than 30 per cent of the Republicans in the House. A similar resolution in the Senate in 2018, for example, while Trump was in office and spoke of leaving NATO, passed by a vote of 97-2 in the 100-member body.

Targeting Member States

A main concern of the U.S., repeatedly expressed by Biden, is what the resolution calls "'democratic recession,' the global erosion of democratic norms, and the rise of authoritarianism." This is in reference mainly to Russia and China but also to forces within member states, what the resolution calls "internal threats from proponents of illiberalism." The U.S., using NATO, wants a justification to further interfere in the internal affairs of member states. It is using this "erosion," to emphasize the need to intervene to "strengthen democratic institutions." As well, the resolution states that "strengthening of democratic institutions is foundational to the collective security of Allies."

Finland, anti-NATO protest, June 4, 2022.

This concern about "democratic recession" also reflects the fear of U.S. and European rulers about the broad dissatisfaction among the people with governments and their institutions. There is a growing sentiment that the existing rulers are not solving any problems, are bent on war and use of violence and sanctions and are unfit to rule. The dysfunction of U.S. elections, Congress and the Executive, with the many conflicts within and between it and the military, are but one example. The hope of the rulers is that by emphasizing "democratic principles," they can lessen the peoples' dissatisfaction.

The resolution elaborates the necessity for all to adhere to the existing U.S.-style liberal democracy. It says, "A shared democratic identity is what distinguishes the Alliance from the principal threats and challenges it faces." NATO must "reassert its core identity as an Alliance rooted in the principles of democracy," it adds. It speaks to "political cohesion," reflecting the existence of contending interests within NATO itself. These are often expressed by Germany and France, such as over natural gas sanctions, and more recently by Turkey in relation to the entry into NATO of Finland and Sweden. It states, "Any commitment to strengthening NATO's political cohesion therefore has to be orientated toward those shared values and ideals, grounded in democracy, rule of law and individual liberty."

In addition, the resolution supports establishing an organizational mechanism for interference, namely "a Center of Excellence for Democratic Resilience in order to strengthen NATO democracies against external threats." There are so many institutions already, one wonders what this one will achieve that the others have not. It also goes without saying that the U.S., which will lead the way in such interference, is not considered a threat. The Center is one more intelligence agency "for monitoring and identifying challenges to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law and facilitating democracy and governance assistance to member, partner, and aspirant states, when requested."

Note the use of the phrase "when requested," the only such mention in the entire resolution to suggest that the U.S. supports the sovereignty of NATO members which is, of course, not the case. The U.S. is known to secure "requests" using threats and blackmail, as is currently the case with Colombia, considered an "aspirant" country to be used to establish NATO in Latin America and the Caribbean.

NATO's "New Strategic Concept"

The resolution also refers to "updating" NATO's "Strategic Concept." This concept is also for purposes of using the issue of "shared values" and "democracy" to bring all the member states in line. It states that NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, "has reiterated that one of the primary purposes of updating the Strategic Concept must be a recommitment to the founding values of the alliance." The resolution also states, "the NATO Parliamentary Assembly supports a new Strategic Concept that reaffirms that the support and strengthening of democratic institutions is foundational to the collective security of allies." And that the situation in "Ukraine underscores the importance of placing shared democratic values at the heart of NATO's Strategic Concept."

In this manner, a requirement for NATO member states and partners is to support these "shared democratic values" as dictated by the U.S. and accept "governance assistance," as it sees fit. As support for Ukraine shows, this "Strategic Concept" is about indebtedness to finance massive militarization, massively arming and creating conditions to block negotiations. Ukraine now has surpassed Israel and Saudi Arabia in receiving the most U.S. military funding.

The "New Strategic Concept" is basically a rehash of the 1990 Paris Charter for a New Europe and its demands to uphold "shared values." The Charter, which was to show the victory of U.S. democracy at the end of the Cold War, has resulted in the current crisis of liberal democratic institutions worldwide. The Center of Excellence for Democratic Resilience will also not be able to escape the fact that these democratic institutions are not on par with the needs of the times.

Conflict Among U.S. Rulers

The vote on the U.S. resolution also underscores the conflicts within U.S. ruling circles over how to secure U.S. domination in conditions where alliances are shifting and the economies and military strength of other major powers are growing. There are some, like the oligarchs behind Trump, who think the U.S. should withdraw from NATO. As House Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky put it, explaining his No vote, NATO is "a relic of the Cold War." He asked, "Why should Americans pay for Europe's defence?" Representative Warren Davidson of Ohio, referred to the call to "adopt a new Strategic Concept for NATO that is clear about its support for shared democratic values and committed to enhancing NATO's capacity to strengthen democratic institutions within NATO member, partner, and aspirant countries." He said, "America's sovereignty is nonnegotiable. I suspect other countries feel the same. We should be strengthening the alliance, not reimagining it as a tool to interfere in one another's domestic politics."

Representative Bill Pascrell Jr. of New Jersey, who supported the resolution, said those opposing were "evidence the GOP [Republican Party] truly is Putin's Party." Retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, a former U.S. Army commander in Europe, said that "perhaps this divisiveness in the U.S. government remains one of Putin's strategic goals that hasn't yet been defeated."

Biden and the oligarchs who back him are among those who consider Russia a greater threat than China and that weakening Russia, as the U.S. is striving to do with the conflict in Ukraine, is the way to go and puts the U.S. in a stronger position to contend with China. Others consider striving for an alliance with Russia and India a better way to secure U.S. control over Europe and Asia. 

All of them leave the peoples out of the equation. It is the peoples' growing resistance and demands for rights that provide a path forward that serves their interests, not the rich, not NATO. It is people's democracies and their anti-war governments that can provide the basis for peace and security.

This article was published in
Volume 52 Number 6 - June 5, 2022

Article Link:


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