US-Dominated NATO’s Hegemonic Strategic Concept

Hegemon USA-dominated NATO’s strategic concept has been around for years.

According to former UN Assistant Secretary-General/Iraq humanitarian coordinator, Hans von Sponeck years earlier:

“In 1999, NATO acknowledged that it was seeking to orient itself according to a new fundamental strategic concept.” 

It aims “to become a broad-based alliance for (seeking and controlling) vital resources needs of its members.” 

So “it set itself new purposes such as assured access to energy sources and the right to intervene in ‘movements of large numbers of persons’ and in conflicts far from the boarders of NATO countries.” 

“The readiness of the new alliance to include other countries, particularly those that had previously been part of the Soviet Union, shows how the character of this military alliance has altered.”

“(T)he UN monopoly of the use of force, especially as specified in Article 51 of the Charter, was no longer accepted according to the 1999 NATO doctrine.”

“NATO’s territorial scope, until then limited to the Euro-Atlantic region, was expanded by its member to encompass the whole world in keeping with a strategic context that was global in its sweep.”

During its annual summit in Madrid from June 26 – 28, the war-making alliance updated its Strategic Concept, notably with nonthreatening Russia and China in mind.

Citing so-called imperatives and challenges for the next decade, Russia is now called the “most significant and direct threat” to NATO’s security (sic) — while China was falsely accused of posing “systemic challenges (sic).”

The above — first time — characterizations are all about what the empire of lies and forever wars considers significant challenges to its hegemonic aims.

As long as China and Russia are united for world peace, stability, multi-world polarity and cooperation among nations — according to the rule of law — and opposed to confrontation, the empire of lies indeed faces an insurmountable challenge to its drive for unchallenged hegemony over planet earth, its resources and populations. 

According to Beijing’s official People’s Daily:

Hegemon USA uses NATO to pursue the following aims:

“(F)omenting confrontation between Europe and Russia to continuously cripple Russia.”

“(U)rging Europe to strengthen its defense and using European resources to ease the pressure on American defense in Europe.” 

(F)orcing US allies to join hands in suppressing China.”

NATO is all about offense in pursuit of hegemon USA’s aims — while pretending to be a defensive alliance.

NATO member states “proclaim(ed) a united wartime front” at the Madrid summit. 

They “prepare(d) the alliance for a new phase of the relationship with Russia” — while calling China “NATO’s next big challenge.”

The People’s Daily stressed the following:

“History proved that only mutually-beneficial cooperation, rather than playing bloc politics, can win over regional countries.” 

Hegemon USA’s “self-serving geopolitical intentions and vicious attempts to drive wedges across the world are doomed to fail.”

“China (prioritizes) world peace.”

It’s “a contributor to global development and a guardian of international order.”

“China does not stir up trouble, but it is not afraid when others do.” 

It’ll “firmly and forcefully respond to any act that infringes upon (its) interests.”

According to China’s Mission to the EU:

Beijing opposes NATO’s Strategic Concept with hostile intentions in mind.

The alliance itself is a Cold War relic. It should have been disbanded years ago.

Unlike US-dominated NATO since established in 1949, China never throughout the post-WW II period waged war against another country — what hegemon USA does perpetually.

Commenting on what NATO member states agreed on at their Madrid summit, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Zhao Lijian, said the following:

The war-making alliance’s “Strategic Concept misrepresented facts and distorted the truth.” 

“NATO once again wrongly defined China as posing ‘systemic challenges.’ ”

“It smeared China’s foreign policy and pointed fingers at China’s normal military posture and defense policy.”

“The document seeks to stoke confrontation and antagonism and smacks heavily of Cold War mentality and ideological bias.”

“China is gravely concerned over this and firmly opposes it.” 

China is…a force for world peace, a contributor to global development and a defender of the international order.”

“China never invaded any country, never launched a proxy war, and never joined or formed any military bloc.”

“We are committed to the path of peaceful development.”

“We aim to build a community with a shared future for mankind.”

“We have advanced high-quality Belt and Road cooperation and put forward the Global Development Initiative and the Global Security Initiative, which are being implemented.”

“China presents valuable opportunities for world peace and development.”

“It does not pose ‘systemic challenges,’ as wrongly purported by NATO.”

“In contrast, it is NATO that poses systemic challenges to world security and stability.”

NATO…wage(s) wars”on invented enemies.

It “has blood…on its hands” for preemptively attacking one nonbelligerent, nonthreatening nation after another. 

It now aims to destabilize the Asia-Pacific.

“Any attempt to undermine its peace and stability and sabotage regional solidarity and cooperation will be unanimously rejected by the people in China and the rest of the” region. 

“Such attempts are bound to fail.”

A joint Sino/Russian declaration for NATO to “abandon its ideologized cold war approaches” fell on deaf ears in Washington and other alliance capitals.

Their ruling regimes long ago abandoned peaceful coexistence with the world community of nations in favor of forever wars of aggression.

NATO’s newly defined Strategic Concept is with this diabolical aim in mind.