Anti-NATO in Madrid

Four days before the NATO summit in Madrid and as a “welcome” the “Summit for Peace. NATO NO” prelude to the demonstration against NATO and the wars, which will take place on Sunday 26th and about which we will inform you in a timely manner.

Pressenza took part in two rounds of talks, of which we would like to share some notes as it is impossible to summarize everything that was discussed.

The first round table on “NATO, Armed Forces and Military Expenditure” was opened by Juan Carlos Rois, who examines what Spain’s military expenditure is and what it is invested in. 10 billion euros, there are many distributed expenditures that depend on other ministries and institutions and themselves amount to up to 39 billion euros. More than three times as much, from around 0.9 percent of GDP to over 3 percent. In many respects it is an intolerable and unnecessary expense and yet untouchable for the various parties that take turns in government. Lovers of details and figures can use the graphics published in to check the basis of these statements alternativeasnoviolentas.org.

He grants Quique Sánchez (IPB, International Peace Bureau) who have gone through various aspects of military spending that fuel tensions by making neighboring or rival countries feel threatened. Peace can never be achieved by increasing the volume of weapons, which always ends in war sooner or later. Defense spending is justified to prevent invasion of one’s territory when purchases and preparations are clearly objectionable. Military spending diverts resources from real needs like health and education. NATO has a military budget 17 times that of Russia and only the UK has a budget close to China’s, so spending on the supposed threat from its hypothetical enemies is difficult to justify.

Center Delàs’ Gemma Amorós explained in detail how NATO’s internal workings consume economic resources in areas such as the numerous demands for standardization of equipment, R&D, continuous military exercises, etc. He also told us how Spain has taken part in 42 military exercises, operations involved in controversial NATO invasions (Afghanistan, Iraq…) and the various American or shared NATO bases that serve as gateways for US interference.

The second round table we attended, dedicated to the topic “The new lies of the old NATO with Ukraine in the background”, was opened by Ainhoa ​​​​Ruíz, who published the report “NATO, building global insecurity” recently published by the Center Delàs. introduced. She presented some ideas from the report that she found interesting. For example, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, 51 walls were built around the NATO world. It is not a world of liberal capitalism where people have gained freedom of movement between countries, unlike capital which moves freely. He spoke of the concept of human security, not security designed for military purposes, but security that results from the satisfaction of one’s own basic needs. The extension of the concept of violence beyond the physical to various areas of human activity. He ended by telling us how devastating NATO is wherever it goes, as has happened in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, and from that point of view it cannot be a good idea to call for NATO intervention in Ukraine, to solve the problems.

Carlos Taibo, professor of political science, specialist in Eastern European countries. Political science professor Carlos Taibo, a specialist on Eastern European countries, said after denouncing the invasion of Ukraine that it was necessary to establish how NATO also shared responsibility for creating the conditions for the conflict. This aspect is important but not publicly available due to censorship in the disinformation media. He explained that since the dissolution of the Soviet Union there have been clear opportunities for Russian integration with Western Europe, but how the various misunderstandings provoked by the US and NATO countries have in some ways created Putin, who eventually went to Ukraine invaded. This conflict has greatly strengthened NATO, heralding further interference and conflict. Carlos warned of the rise of eco-fascism that fights for natural resources and believes there are “too many people” on the planet.

Finally, the journalist Olga Rodríguez, who has worked as a reporter in various conflicts around the world, conveyed the truth about contact with the victims and disasters of the war. She spoke of how the victims of NATO’s wars in the Middle East were inhumanly mistreated yesterday at the borders where Ukrainian refugees are being taken in today. He enumerated various incoherences between NATO and Europe, now weakened and more dependent on the US, which is currently looking for resources in countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Israel that are clearly violating human rights; how NATO pursued a policy of provocation when it wanted to expand into Ukraine, how the warmongering discourse is being exposed, encouraging the continuation and intensification of the war in Ukraine, and even carrying the same model to Taiwan to expand the conflict into China.

Well, a lot more has been said, but we don’t want to bombard you, dear readers, with so many ideas as you have reached the end of the article. We just want to reiterate some ideas from Olga Rodríguez, who told us how she found illiterate victims of conflict, but who have a better understanding of geopolitics than the vast majority of us because they have it engraved on their skin. We reiterate her last request that hopefully one day she will stop being a war correspondent and become a peace correspondent.

Comments are closed.