Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Turkey's plane shoot down and the danger os NATO's Article Five

Why NATO and its Article Five is more dangerous than ISIS. In 1949, when the Cold War was heating up, the Western powers formed a mutual defense pact to curb what they saw as aggressive moves by the Soviets in East Europe after WWII. The resulting North Atlantic Treaty (aka Washington Treaty) spawned the defense alliance that takes the Treaty's name. Article Five is regarded as the "collective defense" article in NATO's Treaty and its "cornerstone."

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .
I have long argued that this article is dangerous for international peace and security - and we see that playing out with regard to Turkey and its shooting down of a Russian bomber engaged in counter terrorist actions in Syria.  The first action Turkey took after shooting down the jet (its crew shot at as they rode parachutes to the ground - and this is a war crime) was to run to NATO and invoke Article Four consultations clause. The Russian plane was not attacking Turkish soil and it's well known that Russia is involved in counter-terrorist operations.

The side question here is about aggressive and reckless actions taken by a NATO member that would get a retaliation response if the state was not a NATO member.  I say it would be immoral and outrageous for NATO members to regard aggressive and reckless actions, to include the war crime of shooting pilots riding parachutes to the ground, to come to the defense of Turkey under threats of Article Five. It is immoral, and as an American, I renounce any Article Five defense for Turkey should Russia retaliate against it, which it will in some form.  The order of things now is to punch Russia and then run under NATO's collective defense coat tails. It's a dangerous order for world peace and must be stopped!

NATO member can act recklessly, aggressively and NATO members must regard any just and right retaliation as "an attack on us all."  It is easy to see why NATO has acted aggressively now and in the past when it comes to poking Russia in the nose. This is true of chiefly Eastern European leaders in Poland and the Baltic countries who have long standing, reckless and dangerous Russophobia. These leaders appear to see any cooperation with Western countries and Russia over the ISIS terrorist organization as a threat to the Cold War mentality they resurrected in Ukraine. They promote the myth of "Russian aggression."  It is right for Russia's Lavrov to suspect NATO pre-planning in the shooting down of Russia's bomber. This pre-planning to sabotage Russian cooperation with Western countries could lead right through NATO to Eastern European state capitals and the desire to maintain NATO's favorite enemy at the expense of much needed counter -terrorist operations against ISIS.