Do they want to detonate Asia?Intersection

NATO eastward expansion, where is the end point? Will NATO be adjacent to China? This was the Global Times with the U.S. military and the "Central Asiaway Wheling" in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan before holding a joint military exercise in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Twenty -five years later, NATO used its actions to answer this question.

Regardless of whether this year's NATO Summit invited the four Asia -Pacific countries leaders of Japan, South Korea,,,,, South Korea, or the commander of NATO, continued to strengthen its existing alliance in the Asia -Pacific region, hoping to shape a "large and multilateral" security structure It shows that after the disruption of Europe, it is trying to extend the tentacles to the Asia -Pacific, thereby "going global." However, history has proved that where NATO's hands are extending, where will it be divided and turbulent. In this regard, the Asia -Pacific countries must not be vigilant.

In 1997, NATO officially decided to invite the three countries of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic to join the organization to laid the foundation for the first round of NATO after the start of the Cold War in 1999.

In 2022, the NATO Madrid Summit invited four countries including Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand for the first time to participate in the "Asia Pacific" of the organization.

Looking back at the history of NATO, it can be found that it first attracted Western Europe to fight against Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, and then combined with Eastern Europe to fight Russia. Now they want to pull the Asia -Pacific countries against China. It can be said that NATO expands eastward while making division.

If it is said that NATO's first secretary -general and British Esmei summarized the core function of the organization -blocking the Soviet Union outside, allowing Americans to stay inside, and holding the Germans. The role of Europe has played in Europe, and with the spread of NATO system architecture and activity areas to the area outside Europe, this typical European -style "NATO Cognition" is not sufficient.

What are the current and future development trends of NATO? For this issue, we need to find answers in the "NATO" in the United States.

"Dance dance" with the strategic adjustment of the United States

In the 1990s, the Clinton government was responsible for promoting the implementation of the executive deputy state -owned Secretary of State Stelb Talbut, which has been promoted after the Cold War transformation and expansion, and repeatedly preached that despite the military organization, NATO has extensive political functions. The "Westernization transformation" of applying for domestic politics and social systems in the country has promoted the emergence of a "Atlantic Community" in a wider range.

Indeed, for the United States, NATO is undoubtedly a "security community" that has strongly changed the domestic politics of Washington's military strength, and strongly changes his domestic politics with security bonds, and then based on the homogeneity of the homogeneity of domestic systems in various countries.

There are three prominent characteristics of this regional security structure: the dominant nature of the United States, the national level of order, and the clear exclusion.

For a long time, most of the political elites in the United States have bluntly stated that NATO is the most important strategic resource for the United States to ensure its global hegemony. Without NATO, the United States will lose tools to control European countries, and it is more difficult to promote the interests of the United States. The evolution of security order.

Each major strategic transformation in NATO history is dominated by the United States, and presented with this destructive cycle mode with the Soviet or Russia.

Focusing on NATO expansion and functional play, is it limited to European regions or to extend to a farther region outside Europe. In the first ten years of the century, the domestic situation in Iraq and Afghanistan was more frequently involved in Asia -Pacific affairs. NATO broke through the boundaries of only European affairs, and the adjustment of the US global strategy continued to define its functions.

With the focus of the United States' strategic focus focusing on the Asia -Pacific and intensive launch of relevant policies, NATO is promoting its "Asia -Pacificization" process, trying to strengthen its function and system in Asia Pacific by rendering the so -called "Chinese threats" as soon as possible.

Want to copy "European division" in Asia Pacific

In order to cooperate with the "anti -terrorism" of the United States, NATO officially launched the "contact country" plan at the 2006 Richard Summit to establish a new mechanism of safe coordination with each other in the Asia -Pacific allies such as Japan, South Korea, and Australia. The process of "Asia Pacific".

The strategic concept announced at the Lisbon Summit in 2010 placed the "Global Partnership" plan, including the "contact country" plan, to prioritize.

Since then, NATO has continued to increase its coordination with the so -called "common values" in the Asia -Pacific so -called "common values" in the fields of intelligence, military and other fields.

In the past 10 years, NATO has taken the "Global Partnership" plan as a link to bring together Asia -Pacific allies resources to focus on "handling" Afghanistan issues, and accelerate the coordination of security defense relations with Japan, South Korea, Australia, and new countries.

Under the leadership of the United States, NATO is the "experience" that it has obtained in the past 30 years -through the manufacture of European division, it leads European security and quickly applies to the practice process of the organization to build the Asia -Pacific security architecture.

NATO has established the United States' hegemonic structure in Europe with a single and one -sided security mechanism in most European countries. Washington has established a NATO mechanism in the Asia -Pacific region that is quite strong, and related actions are in full swing.

The United States is not satisfied with the current "platter -type" Asia -Pacific security structure. Its existing many existing bilateral military alliances, the "three -sided mechanism", and the "Five Eye Alliance" of the United States and Britain and Australia are so -called The layout of the fourth five "layout is difficult to reflect the inherent behavior model of the United States in the entire area, showing levels, and making his inherent behavior. In recent years, the United States has continuously tried to promote the integration of the existing alliance mechanism in the Asia -Pacific region, while promoting NATO as soon as possible to Asia Pacific as soon as possible in terms of systems and actions to further strengthen NATO's "Asia -Pacific" momentum.

NATO Secretary -General Stoltenberg has recently emphasized on many occasions that NATO and Asia -Pacific partners should strengthen pragmatic cooperation in many fields including maritime security and network technology.

The political signal issued by the NATO summit for the first time at the end of June at the end of June is very clear, that is, the coordination between NATO and the Asia -Pacific allies will be more frequent and deeper.

NATO's "Asia Pacific" conceived in the so -called "Indo -Pacific Strategy" pushed in the United States is very obvious.

The United States now hopes to adjust the relationship between the United States, Japan, South Korea, the United States and Australia, and the United States, Australia, and the new, and finally build an alliance relationship to eventually build a "large multilateral" security structure.

It will destroy regional peace and prosperity

With the continuous movement of the strategic focus, the United States has recently accelerated the rhythm of the Asia -Pacific security structure layout.

In addition to accelerating the strengthening and cooperation of Asia -Pacific countries such as Japan, South Korea,,,,,, South Korea, Australia, Australia, and other Asia -Pacific countries, also densely visit other Asia -Pacific countries, including Bayeon, to create an atmosphere of "fear of Chinese" international public opinion, and promote the national security defense strategy to interview Docking with NATO and other allies of the United States, accelerating the formation of NATO as the core while driving the US Asia -Pacific allies to curb China's region and even global security structure.

These actions in the United States are very similar to the continued intensifying the contradiction between NATO countries and Russia in Europe, thereby creating division.

NATO East expansion has led to the emergence of military conflicts in Europe, Russia and NATO's long -term opposition, and European divisions.

Based on this observation, the "Asia -Pacificization" led by the United States will become a scourge in the Asia -Pacific region and destroying regional peace and prosperity.

This military alliance will definitely use the strategic logic of the geopolitical competition of a large country to force the Asia -Pacific countries to choose the side team between China and the United States, leading to a more and more intense regional crisis and conflict in the Asia -Pacific region, and it is likely to promote the security and safety of the Asia -Pacific region The economy has split, thereby completely interrupting the regional economic integration process.

According to the "NATO 2022 Strategic Concept" approved at the NATO Madrid Summit a few days ago, this military alliance has three core tasks in the next 10 years: deterrent defense, crisis prevention management, and cooperation security.

In terms of deterrent defense, the United States and its allies are increasing military expenditures, and this will trigger arms competitions in multiple regions, leading to regional tight situations.

In terms of crisis prevention and management, it is remembered that NATO has carried out so -called "crisis prevention and management" in the South League, Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries, and the consequences of these actions in Washington are obvious to all in the world.

In terms of so -called "cooperation security", if NATO will strengthen its core function in the Asia -Pacific region, it is likely to create a serious crisis on the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea issue. One process will also be the process of transforming the internal politics, economic, and social systems of other countries. In the complex Asia -Pacific region, NATO's approach will definitely cause contradictions and conflicts.

Weaken the authority of the United Nations

If the "Asia Pacific" process of NATO is progressing smoothly, a "global NATO" security pattern will eventually appear.

This will be the core of the global security architecture blueprint in the United States, but it is not what the country that loves world peace.

The "North Atlantic Convention" claims that the Convention Party reiterated its belief in the United Nations Charter and hopes to get along with all people and all governments.

NATO also stated that the legitimacy of its core function of "collective defense" comes from paragraph 51 of the United Nations Charter on "Natural Rights of Collective Self -Defense".

However, NATO has not authorized the Kosovo war with the United Nations, and tampered with the relevant UN resolutions to launch a war on the change of regime for Libya and continued to carry out military operations outside the defense zone. Far away, the organization has transformed into a "weapon" and accomplice that is highly offensive and fully serving the United States hegemony.

A NATO, a banner that pulls the "Value League", is working on the US Western hegemony, and weakening the authority of the United Nations. It is trying to create a new division with the group in the Asia -Pacific region through the division of three, six and nine.

The Special Summit, Foreign Minister Association and Madrid Summit held by NATO this year are all intensive discussions and the institutional arrangements for strengthening coordination with the Asia -Pacific Alliance with the US Asia -Pacific Alliance. There is no exception to render the so -called "Chinese threat" to promote NATO's global security functions.

What is more concerned about is that NATO has repeatedly emphasized the importance of establishing and setting up international rules in the near future.

Indeed, the persistence and stability of the relationship between countries cannot open the abide by the parties to the international rules, but a military alliance that promotes "the theory of civilization and superiority" and "sovereignty relativity" and play with the group's politics. Most countries recognize.

In the future, the global security structure must not be constructed by the alliance system of "Globalization NATO", but must return to the reason and health of the United Nations core position.

- END -