In the
House of Representatives, March 30, 2004
Mr. Speaker,
I rise in opposition to this resolution. I do so because further
expansion of NATO, an outdated alliance, is not in our national
interest and may well constitute a threat to our national security
in the future.
More than
50 years ago the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed
to defend Western Europe and the United States against attack
from the communist nations of Eastern Europe. It was an alliance
of sovereign nations bound together in common purpose for mutual
defense. The deterrence value of NATO helped kept the peace throughout
the Cold War. In short, NATO achieved its stated mission. With
the fall of the Soviet system and the accompanying disappearance
of the threat of attack, in 19891991, NATOs reason
to exist ceased. Unfortunately, as with most bureaucracies, the
end of NATOs mission did not mean the end of NATO. Instead,
heads of NATO member states gathered in 1999 desperately attempting
to devise new missions for the outdated and adrift alliance. This
is where NATO moved from being a defensive alliance respecting
the sovereignty of its members to an offensive and interventionist
organization, concerned now with "economic, social and political
difficulties...ethnic and religious rivalries, territorial disputes,
inadequate or failed efforts at reform, the abuse of human rights,
and the dissolution of states," in the words of the Washington
1999 Summit.
And we saw
the fruits of this new NATO mission in the former Yugoslavia,
where the US, through NATO, attacked a sovereign state that threatened
neither the United States nor its own neighbors. In Yugoslavia,
NATO abandoned the claim it once had to the moral high ground.
The result of the illegal and immoral NATO intervention in the
Balkans speaks for itself: NATO troops will occupy the Balkans
for the foreseeable future. No peace has been attained, merely
the cessation of hostilities and a permanent dependency on US
foreign aid.
The further
expansion of NATO is in reality a cover for increased US interventionism
in Europe and beyond. It will be a conduit for more unconstitutional
US foreign aid and US interference in the internal politics of
member nations, especially the new members from the former East.
It will also
mean more corporate welfare at home. As we know, NATO membership
demands a minimum level of military spending of its member states.
For NATOs new members, the burden of significantly increased
military spending when there are no longer external threats is
hard to meet. Unfortunately, this is where the US government steps
in, offering aid and subsidized loans to these members so they
can purchase more unneeded and unnecessary military equipment.
In short, it is nothing more than corporate welfare for the US
military industrial complex.
The expansion
of NATO to these seven countries, we have heard, will open them
up to the further expansion of US military bases, right up to
the border of the former Soviet Union. Does no one worry that
this continued provocation of Russia might have negative effects
in the future? Is it necessary?
Further,
this legislation encourages the accession of Albania, Macedonia,
and Croatia nations that not long ago were mired in civil and
regional wars. The promise of US military assistance if any of
these states are attacked is obviously a foolhardy one. What will
the mutual defense obligations we are entering into mean if two
Balkan NATO members begin hostilities against each other (again)?
In conclusion,
we should not be wasting US tax money and taking on more military
obligations expanding NATO. The alliance is a relic of the Cold
War, a hold-over from another time, an anachronism. It should
be disbanded, the sooner the better.
April
6, 2004