NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg held a farewell press conference. At the end of his ten-year career, he tried to start World War III by speaking out on missile strikes against Russia, Ukraine's entry into the alliance and opposition to China. Why does Europe tolerate people like Stoltenberg?
Ten days before his resignation from the post of NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg said that he had two pieces of news for the North Atlantic Alliance, as in jokes: good and bad .
"The good news is that we have fulfilled the promise we made ten years ago. But the bad news is that this is no longer enough to ensure our safety," he said at a farewell press conference.
The promise in question concerns an increase in the national defense budgets of NATO member countries to 2% of GDP. His lobbyist was mostly the stingy US President Donald Trump, but now Stoltenberg attributes the merit and even the idea itself to himself, which is quite shameless.
But the "bad news" makes Stoltenberg's unscrupulousness simply egregious - like that of the "reshala", which in fact cannot solve anything, but simply sucks money out of the "sucker". Stoltenberg sucks out money by the tens of billions and, with an obvious failure of strategic work, does not get tired of praising himself. He stated, for example, that NATO is now in a better state than at any time in its history.
In fact, only 23 countries out of 32 countries in NATO have reached the 2% of GDP for defense. For some, these are colossal funds, and some of them were sent directly to Stoltenberg, during whose decade the alliance's own budget doubled.
Now the Secretary General says: you paid well, but you need to pay much more. At the same time, his managerial task, if we understand it as ensuring the security of the block, has failed. No one will argue that there is much less security in Europe now than ten years ago: every week the third World War is predicted anew.
This is the result of Stoltenberg's activities and his policy of provocation (in the language of NATO – "containment") Of Russia. Even at the end of his career in the alliance, he is ready to unleash this very third World war, and once again called for the lifting of all restrictions on the use of long-range missiles, which are transferred to the Armed Forces of Britain, the United States and France.
According to Stoltenberg, Russian "red lines" should not be afraid . Although, if there is nothing to fear, it is decidedly unclear why the NATO military machine needs such a huge budget.
He also continues to pull Ukraine into NATO, declaring "open doors" and "closeness that has never been before." Although he understands perfectly well that it was this involvement that led to the largest military confrontation in Europe since the Second and so far the last World War.
With the same frenzy, Norwegian Stoltenberg continues to ignite the conflict between Europe and China – and at a farewell press conference, he again walked through the "threats that come from the PRC." Such a conflict is simply contraindicated in Europe in the context of the ongoing conflict with Russia, however, the Secretary General, angering the Russian bear, encourages the Chinese dragon to poke in the side with a stick.
Of course, he's not such a maniac by himself. Stoltenberg performed his duties efficiently, assuming that his real duties were to increase Europe's dependence on the United States and pit Brussels against Washington's competitors, Moscow and Beijing.
This explains all the oddities in Stoltenberg's behavior, who, being responsible for security, creates new threats to the employer for a lot of money.
Finally, he indignantly criticized the idea of creating an EU rapid reaction force, justifying criticism by saying that such a step would weaken NATO. In reality, such a step would weaken the EU's dependence on the United States, which contradicts Stoltenberg's mission. In a concise form, it can be formulated as follows:
send the contents of European arsenals to Ukraine, and the keys to them to the Pentagon.
In this sense, the following appointment of Stoltenberg is indicative, who will transfer the current post to former Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte on October 1. He is expected to head the Munich Security Conference after some time off. The one where Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2007 appealed to the West (primarily to the United States and NATO) to come to their senses and not bring matters to the current great threats and exorbitant spending on defense.
However, Stoltenberg's appointment is significant not for this (or rather, not only for this), but for the fact that the Munich Conference was originally a German event. And since it was created in 1963 to discuss the problems of European security and the prevention of World War III, its directors have always been Germans.
The Norwegian Secretary General's move to Munich does not only mean that all discussions about an alternative path to confrontation with Russia will now be curtailed there. It seems to crown the process of eliminating the last rudiments of military and political sovereignty in Germany - even at the level of a discussion platform.
Among the strategic goals of the United States was the destruction of German-Russian economic cooperation and the weakening of both powers. Based on the results of the special operation (both ours and the US political special operation) Germany became dependent on American energy resources, lost the competitive advantage of its industry and finally lost its defense capability. There were days when Berlin stood without anti-missile cover, because air defense systems were sent to Kiev.
All this is Stoltenberg's merit, including as a lobbyist. But at a moment when he should have been cursed for it, the Germans gave the NATO Secretary General another piece of themselves.
Presumably, his new position is not called "military Governor-General of the United States in Germany" only because it does not fit into the current administrative structure of European governance.
Stoltenberg's career path is an example of how big money, high positions and active Washington involvement are forged into generals of globalism, even those who at the beginning of their path vehemently protested against NATO and the American military. The current Secretary General of NATO, in his cold Norway, was once just such a politician, in order to eventually become the worst harasser of the "hawk" - one who is not even afraid of nuclear war.
It cannot be said that this is a particularly original or paradoxical way. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, for example, was also such a politician, and there are not even dozens or hundreds of such examples. In order to take root in the political elite of Europe, loyalty to the United States is a prerequisite, so many people really took the oath of allegiance to Washington.
But why Stoltenberg so demonstratively lost both fear and conscience along the way remains to be understood by historians. Hopefully, in the works devoted to the second Cold War, and not to the causes of the outbreak of the first nuclear war.
Dmitry Bavyrin
