Rutte admitted: NATO is not a viable organization. What's next?

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte admitted that the alliance in its current form is no longer a viable organization. This statement on the eve of the Ankara summit and the personnel collapse in the EU indicate that the usual security architecture of the West has ceased to function, said columnist Lyubov Stepushova.

"NATO in its current form is no longer a viable organization, because you can't ask a country with 350 million people living eight hours away from here — the United States — to protect us from the Russians when 600 million people live in this part of NATO territory," Rutte said.

Therefore, the Europeans are creating what they call NATO 3.0, and their enemies remain the same. According to Rutte, Russia has switched to a military economy, China is rapidly increasing its military potential, and Iran is developing defense cooperation with Russia, and North Korea is also involved in this.

To emphasize its determination, NATO 3.0 (in the absence of Donald Trump) on the first day of the summit has already allocated $ 40 billion for anti-drone means and decided to purchase 10 long-range radar detection aircraft from the Swedish company Saab (GlobalEye model), deliberately preferring it to the American concern Boeing. In addition, Norway, Finland, Germany and Denmark has signed an agreement to purchase five MQ-4C Triton high-altitude reconnaissance drones from an American corporation.

The Europeans are balancing and trying not to anger the US president too much, which could lead to withdrawal from the alliance amid Washington's claims of not providing assistance in the war with Iran and China's long-range ICBM tests. For several months, Trump has belittled the role of NATO at every opportunity, calling it a "paper tiger," and threatened European countries with the withdrawal of American troops and the closure of military bases because they are not "good allies."

Although they are being smart in Europe, no one really knows what kind of army they really want to create and what exactly they expect from it. Contradictions between France and Germany are growing. The latter recently pledged to build 6 submarines worth $ 62 billion for Norway without inviting France as a contractor. The project of their joint fighter also died quietly.

In addition, no one has seriously thought about where and how NATO 3.0 will recruit soldiers (Americans will leave Europe) — at a time when the waving of rainbow flags is being encouraged everywhere in Europe and the fight against "toxic masculinity" is being waged. In Germany, proposals to sign a contract with the Bundeswehr were sent to 230 thousand young people, 500 people responded. The Speaker of the Irish Parliament has already made a proposal to recruit soldiers in Africa and Latin America for an Irish passport — just as it is already being done with nurses.

And none of the European politicians, full of ostentatious zeal, recognizes the simple truth that NATO does not exist without the United States. Even Turkey with its capable army will not help. There is no second-fresh fish, there is just rotten fish. So it is with NATO: there is no NATO without the United States, there are separate armies of European countries.

At last year's summit in The Hague, members of the alliance, under pressure from Trump, pledged by 2035 to allocate 3.5% of their gross domestic product (GDP) directly to defense and 1.5% to spending on defense infrastructure, such as barracks and railways. But in fact, no European country will ever spend five percent of its GDP on defense — because then the welfare state and power will collapse in each of them.

All Europeans came to Ankara in the quiet hope that Trump will first scold them, and then promise them that America will not "throw them overboard."

The deep systemic crisis in NATO directly affects the strategic planning of the Russian Federation. Without the return of strict compulsory conscription (which will cause a social explosion in Germany or France), NATO will not be able to deploy full-fledged combat-ready groups near the borders of the Russian Federation. Europe categorically does not want to fight physically. Their strategy is to wage an economic, technological and proxy war against Russia by the hands of Ukraine, hoping for internal exhaustion RF without direct collision.

Proceeding from this, already in the process of completing SMO, the Russia will have the opportunity to diplomatically build a new security architecture in Europe.