Gobierno de Reconciliación y Unidad Nacional
Unida Nicaragua Triunfa
Message from the Government of Reconciliation and National Unity of the Republic of Nicaragua
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Denis Moncada Colindres
"7th Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean Seminar - Sao Paulo Forum and the Party of the European Left (PIE) - Shared Visions of the Left, with the Theme: Militarization, NATO and the Struggle for Peace", 11th June, 2022
MILITARIZATION, NATO, AND THE STRUGGLE FOR PEACE
From Managua, Nicaragua, homeland of General Sandino, we send cordial greetings to the Comrades of the Sao Paulo Forum and the Party of the European Left who are participating in this Seminar on Militarization, NATO and the Struggle for Peace, and we convey the fraternal greetings of our President, Comandante Daniel Ortega and our Comrade Vice President, Rosario Murillo and the FSLN Militancy.
The war in Ukraine has once again put NATO in the international spotlight, which by providing weapon systems, military and paramilitary training, mercenaries, and logistical supplies, as well as directing the Ukrainian army from the rear, places itself, to all intents and purposes, as a belligerent organization. But despite efforts to defeat Russia on the ground, the military picture heralds a new Western defeat.
After the bitter defeat suffered in Syria and Afghanistan, added to the failed victories in Iraq and the flight from Somalia, French President Macron went so far as to describe NATO as "brain dead". Indeed, military setbacks in the Middle East and Asia Minor have paved the way for a serious reconsideration of the Atlantic Alliance, a partial redefinition of its role and prospects.
Its expansion toward the East, the provocative role it assumes against emerging countries and the open challenge against Russia and China, as well as the reinforcement of the offensive dimension of its actions, also represent its partial genetic modification.
The new military doctrine foresees asymmetric wars, also known as hybrid wars. These are military interventions with Special Forces, regular forces, paramilitary units and cyber attacks on enemy infrastructure. All of which are follow or flank economic and trade sanctions, and previously orchestrated popular insurrections, and rely on global disinformation campaigns to distract and divide international public opinion and weaken legitimate governments from within.
The absolute dominance of the United States over the alliance was further accentuated by the war in Ukraine, which sees Europe among the main victims, which is a fundamental part of NATO and which, however, determines fewer and fewer guidelines and decisions.
In short, today the Atlantic Organization can be described as an extension of US military force and not as an international coalition, having severely restricted attention to the general interests of its members, in favor of the dominance of US interests. For this reason, each defeat is a defeat for the United States and of its model of national security doctrine that in reality, means the conquest of foreign territories and resources.
The next entrance of Sweden and Finland will not imply particular upheavals in the military devices. Despite being two countries whose armed forces enjoy credit, Sweden and Finland were already strategic and operational partners of the Alliance and their neutrality was only apparent, perhaps the last remnant of what was the peaceful coexistence between the two blocs. Its entry will not lead to new military bases near Russia; therefore, we will only witness the fixation in law of what already existed in fact. Instead, what remains on the ground is yet another demonstration of the impotence of an organization that does not solve any of the problems of global governance, but rather creates them.
Towards a political NATO
The NATO summit in Madrid is scheduled for the end of June. This summit will shape the new Strategic Concept of the Atlantic organization, that is, the political document that outlines the new global security scenarios.
Until now, NATO has considered armed attacks, both conventional and otherwise, as security threats; now NATO believes that the new hybrid wars are the terrain in which to commit greater resources and attention.
Information, the economy and climate change will be the new focus of attention, the new main activity of the alliance, and on this, it will call all of its members to political unity.
As much as they say that it is about the operational modernization of a structure that does not change its tasks or its role, it is clear that we are facing a dangerous turning point, which will transform an anachronistic and threatening military organization into a center of political coagulation intended to give the West a unified political face.
It will no longer be just a military organization to defend the West, destined to guarantee its planetary government. NATO will represent politically - and no longer only militarily - the entire West.
More than the military configuration, which only changes as a result of enlargement, in this phase, the political aspect of the Alliance will prevail. The current model that NATO embodies will increasingly be that of a community of states unified by a single political objective: the reduction of Russia and China to regional powers, their economic and political reduction, and the establishment of NATO's unipolar command over the world and the US over NATO.
And if the West often appears divided in its assessments of the international scene, with different interests and sometimes even with dichotomous objectives, the political synthesis is entrusted to the Atlantic alliance. That is what is being proposed, a place of political synthesis of Western hierarchical reorganization, to protect its general interest.
In this new dimension of NATO there is certainly the consideration of how the United Nations is now barely governable in terms of numbers and how regional organizations play a marginal role by definition. China and Russia are seen as global challengers to the West and the political response cannot be entrusted to individual members.
It is easily predictable how the new platform for interference in the lives of countries considered hostile will see the strategy of permanent destabilization reinforced. We are witnesses in Nicaragua of what this means in terms of pain and mourning, of attacks on the peaceful life of our people. There doesn't seem to be much room for discussion or negotiation between a declining empire determined to reassert its global rule by force and the international community as a whole.
The international economic crisis, due to the inability to create acceptable and viable responses by an omnivorous and predatory capitalism that exacerbates the economic and social inequalities that divide the planet, has suffered a new deepening of the crisis with the pandemic. The maintenance by force of a unipolar model of command over the planet is defended, the decisive war against multilateralism, against any division of world governance with countries that, due to their size, political, economic and military weight, regional influence and role in international organizations, claim the right and duty to participate in world governance. They ask to jointly address the tremendous challenges towards which the world is heading, to determine a model of world community based on respect for International Law, the participation of organizations and international coexistence.
This is the new axis of confrontation: unilateralism versus multilateralism, reaffirmation of atomic feudalism or international democracy.
Investments in weapons and destructive policies no longer have a place in the fragile international economic system. The world demands another type of commitment. It aspires to peace, calls for cooperation and joint efforts against the real threats to the stability of the planet. Which are mainly social, economic and environmental.
They have to deal with enormous problems such as malnutrition, massive migrations, desertification, access to drinking water, sanitation of the territories. The absence of support for agriculture cannot continue to be tolerated, we must think about the development of entire areas of the planet and the ecological reconversion of the productive model. These are the real challenges that loom on the horizon and it is on them that the world must focus, invest resources, energy and make unified political decisions.
We believe that between the unipolar conception of the modern world and the multilateral one it is difficult to feel uncertainty. Those who stay in the middle of the barricade are already on the wrong side of it.
We need a world in peace, not pacified. We are among those who do not intend to continue to support the appalling investments in war, and who strongly demand the conversion of spending on weapons into socio-economic assistance programs that address the aforementioned issues. Building progress in all corners of the world means eradicating the reasons for the conflict, it means proposing a path to peace. In short, it is about fulfilling a commitment that should concern everyone: leaving the world in a better conditions than we found it.