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 on which the Halifax
International Security Forum, initiated in 2009 and organized by the
same U.S. personnel, is modeled.
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.
The Innu Nation of Labrador and Eastern Quebec
(Nitassin) held a compelling series of protests (above) in the mid
1980s, supported Canada-wide, against the military's plan to conduct
low-level
flight testing and laser-guided bombing in central and southern
Labrador.
|
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.
Demonstations 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.
This article was published in
Volume 49 Number 11 - March 30, 2019
Article Link:
70th Anniversary of the Founding of NATO: No to NATO! Dismantle NATO! Make Canada a Zone for Peace!
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|