In the past two days, the old NATO (NATO) finally presented the important document that has been brewing for a long time at the meeting of foreign ministers: the reform report of NATO2030 (NATO 2030), which tries to solve the current trend of “brain death”.
NATO2030 puts forward a total of 138 suggestions. It is naturally the right meaning of the topic to contain Russia, but at the same time it puts China in an unprecedentedly important position, such as being alert to China’s rapid rise in the Asia-Pacific region and thinking about how to deal with the improvement of China’s international political and military strength.
NATO attaches great importance to China, which is not surprising or surprising, but inevitable in the international environment. Of course, this hostile positioning cannot be separated from the United States, the driving force behind it. The United States is NATO’s brain.
Even if its leadership has declined, it will not give up using NATO, an international smitch that has been around the world for decades. The United States’ National Security Strategy Report in 2017 and the National Defense Strategy Report in 2018 all have this strong cold war expression. For example, the National Defense Strategy Report criticized China, claiming that China was to replace the global dominance of the United States.
The United States’ all-round siege of China is already an openly bullying evil. Now the United States is going to lead NATO against China. Is this a blessing or misfortune of NATO?
NATO’s original intention was to confront, but gradually lost
Born in the Cold War, NATO was designed to fight against the Soviet camp, and later evolved into a fight against Russia. In the past few decades, Russia, which has been tied to one hand and one foot by the economy, has struggled to single-handedly challenge the NATO camp, and the defensive front has retreated step by step. NATO seems to be powerful, but it is not much better. In seven years, there are many internal contradictions and cohesion has declined significantly.
Militaryly, Trump repeatedly urged countries to increase military spending and share their own pressure. In fact, he hoped that he would not do anything and that European partners rushed forward to block bullets. The European “troika” Britain, France and Germany are obviously not motivated. Although military spending has increased in recent years, there is still a gap with Trump’s asking price, and France is also engaged in Germany’s small circle of European coalition forces.
The first joint war in Afghanistan between NATO and NATO is also in a bad way. Politically, there are differences between the United States and Europe in their attitudes and actions towards Iran, Turkey and even Russia. Economically, the United States has nakedly put its interests above Europe, and the additional tariffs are still collected. The “North Stream II” natural gas transportation project, which transfuses blood to Europe, has been installed everywhere in the United States.
In all these, it is really difficult for the United States and Europe to truly love each other.
NATO’s way out is really on China
Originally, NATO had the common challenge of the Soviet Union (Russia), which needed to attack and defend the alliance, act together, and cover up their differences, at least let members put aside their hatred internally and form an external output of combat power. When the Soviet Union broke up and Russia’s strength was weak, the huge machine of NATO was flashed to the waist. Those chaotic small countries in the Middle East are obviously unable to take over NATO firepower. Therefore, NATO inevitably fell into the soul of Duguqiuqiu three questions: Who am I? Why do I exist? Who is my target?
Looking around the world, only China can match it. Some time ago, Beijing just came up with the blueprint of the 14th Five-Year Plan and the long-term goals for 2035, and the prospect is very attractive. In the next 10 years, China will be stronger and occupy the C position on the world stage more strongly than in the past 10 years. China is an inescapable topic for NATO in the future.
NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg said that China is “coming closer and closer to us” and poses “an important challenge to our security”. There is no way. If NATO continues to survive, it can only place its hope for survival on China in an attempt to demonize China into a Soviet-like existence. This can be seen from the degree of attention of NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg to NATO2030.
Of course, this is also the regular choice of some hardcore brothers in the United States. The same is true of the “Asia-Pacific version of NATO” that almost formed in the Asia-Pacific region. For example, the “Reciprocal Access Agreement” of the small circle of Japan and Australia is full of the smell of “China’s threat”. Japan’s 2020 edition of the Defense White Paper also regards China as the “number one threat”. Recently, Australia, which has become very popular, has become very active in a honey situation that is almost inevitable.
NATO’s dead end will be against China
In the past, the Soviet Union (Russia) could allow NATO to concentrate its firepower. The key was that the Soviet Union (Russia) and NATO’s interests were too fiercely competitive. Either you die or I live, and we must compete with each other. Today’s relationship with China is not for that purpose. In European and American thinking, there seems to be only binary, either 1 or 0, while China plays the “Belt and Road” Taijiquan. It is strong and soft, push and pull together, which can be a chaotic state, advocating and achieving mutual benefit and win-win cooperation.
As the old saying goes, the situation is better than people. If you choose a cannon, you will only lose the rice. Leaving aside the United States, European countries can’t do without China, which has already embarked on the fast lane. Obama admitted in his new book that he could have toughened China if it had not been for the economic crisis.
Americans themselves know that the economy that determines the superstructure is fundamental. There is a serious problem. European and American countries in NATO must recognize that only the United States will benefit from fighting against China. If we follow the United States to forcibly decouple China, it will only make Europe, which is weak in economy and troubled at home and abroad, miss the opportunity to share China’s development dividend. And this is obviously not a way to survive.
In fact, in a recent report on Sino-US relations published by the United States, it has told the world its selfishness. The report is 70 pages long. In fact, there are only three sentences. First, repair alliances, especially European allies; second, the United States needs help to fight against China together; third, strengthen and suppress China in an all-round way. To put it bluntly, my friends, including Europe, come on, everyone rushes for me and besiege China in an all-round way. Listen, it would be silly if the members of NATO in Europe were really obedient.
NATO’s living path is actually to cooperate with China
The nourishment of 5,000 years of civilization endows the Chinese people with superb wisdom. While the United States and the West are keen on confrontation, China has begun to explore a new way of win-win cooperation for all mankind through concrete and practical concepts and grasps such as the Belt and Road Initiative and the Community of Human Destiny. In the end, there must be a civilization that is beneficial to all mankind to replace civilizations that want to create confrontation and instability within mankind.
After the outbreak of COVID-19, Western countries fantasized that this would become China’s Chernobyl moment, but this black swan became the Western Chernobyl moment. The successful fight against the epidemic has proved the superiority of the Chinese system and the friendship of the Chinese nation. Choosing to cooperate with China is the real way out.
Of course, cooperation is not the original intention of NATO, a product of the Cold War, and it is not in the interest of the United States. But today’s bilateral relations between China and the United States are not the relationship between the two camps of the Cold War. You have me and I have you in the whole world. Cooperation is more in line with the trend than confrontation. It’s time for NATO to change its “brain” without changing its thinking. If you have a headache to heal your feet, you will only bring beriberi into your mind.
NATO actually has only two countries, one is the United States and the other country. I hope that other countries in NATO can choose the right path and never be taken into the sewer. Once the ship capsizes, Titanic will not be saved. The boat that capsized in the sewer will not be missed by later generations.