Researcher Ainoa Ruiz: "After the arrival of NATO, there is nothing left of the countries"
On the eve of the NATO summit in Madrid, the opposite counter-summit will take place, which will be attended by supporters of a different approach to peace issues. In an interview with Público, the participant of the event told why she considers the alliance at least a controversial organization.
Danilo Albin
The summit has a counter-summit. In contrast to those who solve problems with the help of military forces, supporters of dialogue are speaking out. Big business wars against pacifism. And it is on the side of the latter that Ainhoa Ruiz, a researcher at the Centro Delàs de Estudios por la Paz, is on the side of the latter. Ruiz is taking part in an event that takes place on Friday and Saturday this week in Madrid and is the opposite of the upcoming meeting of NATO leaders, which will be held in the same city.
Público: — What does this summit of the North Atlantic Alliance mean?
Ainoa Ruiz: — On the one hand, the very place where the summit is taking place already means something. The host country shows its commitment to NATO and thus supports its decisions, whether they are right or not. In addition, this country, in this case Spain, is strengthening within the alliance. The deployment of the police and the costs of the summit are quite large. Thus, Spain strengthens its position in the alliance. She wants to play a significant role in it.
— What value does a countersammit acquire?
— It should be borne in mind that NATO is, at least, a controversial organization, because, among other things, it violated international humanitarian law and the UN Charter when it bombed Yugoslavia, and destabilized countries such as Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. Therefore, there are many reasons for holding a summit for peace, for other ways of building security. We need to start looking for other approaches, and they are all connected to the world.
— Will the counter-summit discuss the alternatives that pacifism offers in the current situation?
— We should not forget that what is happening in Ukraine is connected with the behavior of NATO and its members: the creation of tension, the desire to expand to the east ... <...> This reinforces our main message: we don't need such a way of building security, because there are even more wars from it. In the case of Ukraine, it is naive to ignore the role of NATO in creating tension between countries. Everything that the alliance offers is associated with greater tension.
— The Delas Center is organizing a seminar at the counter-summit as part of the Stop Killer Robots campaign. Do these machines now pose another threat to the world?
— We are talking about such a weapon system, which at the most advanced stage is not controlled by a person. We have already seen how the United States conducted indiscriminate drone attacks on Pakistan. A soldier who remotely controls such weapons does not see what is happening, and the situation is even more dehumanized. A country that decides to wage war with such weapons will not have deaths.
— The same week, the Secretary of State for Trade presented to Congress data on arms exports in 2021. Among the recipients were again Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which are striking Yemen...
— We already know that there is a network that has the same power as the lobby. The military industry spends millions of euros in Brussels to ensure a permanent presence. It acts as a lobby. For her, benefits are more important than lives. Private companies have such connections with politicians that we, non-governmental organizations, do not have.
— NATO wants its members to increase budget spending on defense. Is this the right way to solve the current problems?
— It's amazing that we have the Ministry of Defense and so many tools for war, but at the same time so few mechanisms for peace. Peace could be achieved, among other things, by committing not to join NATO. This organization creates tension, it leaves a scorched earth, no matter which country it comes to. Why is there no organization instead of NATO that would do the opposite, would be engaged in diplomacy? Very few resources are being invested in the world right now.
