NATO and imperialism

In 1945, the defeat of fascist Hitler by Stalin's armies and the Soviet occupation of half of Germany and a portion of Europe alarmed the capitalist world.

Following this, the US took over the role of caretaker of the capitalist world from the UK, turned toward establishing a new world system in New York, and through semi-secret meetings, "Fortresses of Capitalism" were created with political and administrative organizations such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the IMF, and the World Bank.

After the war, on April 4, 1949, NATO was established as a military alliance against the Communists, consisting of Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the UK, and the US.

As a military alliance, NATO was justified in participating countries on the grounds of saving on expenditures. Specifically, the prevailing view regarding the economic justification for military alliances was that countries coming together for defense could achieve economic advantages by creating a joint defense system, allowing the savings from each country's defense spending to be directed toward different economic areas. NATO, which was established as a defense system in a world dominated by the Cold War, has appeared in the context of strong-weak relations since its inception, and especially in today's single-system, multipolar world, it has transformed into a kind of imperialist tool.

Indeed, just as in the suppression and regression of leftist thought in Turkey, our ideological redirection toward irrelevant areas—as seen in the Korean War in the 1950s to ensure our entry into NATO—also ranks among the negative examples of NATO. Military dependency also brings political dependency to the agenda, and as seen in today's Middle East war, NATO currently functions as a factor that makes it difficult for our country to pursue an independent and neutral policy in line with its own interests.

The words imperialism and NATO are complementary, with one being the umbrella and the other the implementation tool of that umbrella. Specifically, imperialism, by definition, is the activity of a state or a center of dominance to influence and indirectly govern the periphery by extending its sphere of influence and management to other states or areas.

NATO, which appears to be a defense pact, is a power relationship established from the center to the periphery under the guise of its military structure. Especially in current conditions where the Soviet role of balancing the Western world has disappeared, NATO has turned into a tool for its de facto leader, the US, to establish covert dominance over peripheral countries.

As it has been since its inception, NATO, with its current image and function, is more than just a political-military organization; it is a form of political pressure and imperialist structure, parallel to economic imperialism. Countries included in NATO, both as a requirement of the military alliance and as its ideological structure, are positioned alongside and as defenders of capitalism against communism. Indeed, just as leftist movements in Turkey have been against NATO, NATO has played a major role in the suppression of leftist movements in Turkey.

In current conditions where the Middle East War is gaining momentum, the pressure of NATO on Turkey—which would be in its own interest to remain neutral—has gone far beyond mere organizational solidarity and has evolved into a position of de facto intervention. It would not be wrong to view the naval base command NATO established at the exit of the Bosphorus, as if violating the Montreux Convention, and the military system at the corps level that is on the agenda to be deployed in the southeastern border region, as an attempt—a threat—against Turkey preventing the use of US bases that could be used in response to attacks on Iran.

In current conditions where the Middle East is being torn apart, while Turkey should remain neutral, the lack of a national reaction to the two strategic-political initiatives NATO has carried out in our country creates the impression that Turkey, whose decision-making power is somehow obstructed, is being dragged into a conflict zone. Bringing two major Middle Eastern countries, Iran and Turkey, face to face means not only pitting two countries against each other in a meaningless and unnecessary way, but also pitting two sects against each other, which creates an unparalleled opportunity for the Western world. Considering the breaking of the power of Iran, which Israel and the West consider an enemy, and the bringing under control of the Kurdish groups and the mercenary groups working in the region in the emptied spaces of Syria and Iraq, a careful review of the famous "Greater Middle East Project" and the duties and authorities of the co-presidency office tasked with the project is an indispensable necessity under these conditions.

The calculations of the US, which is at the stage of realizing that it is bogged down in the Middle East war due to its reckless aggression, and in this context, the extraordinary effects of NATO on Turkey under the one-man regime, strike fear into us.

In this context, how the word "Greater" in the "Greater Middle East Project" resonates in which minds, what kind of visions are being conjured up regarding our country's indivisible integrity and borders in this context, and the position that amounts to the occupation of our country by foreign elements, should be thoroughly thought through and discussed in broad social and political circles.

In our country, where there is not a single fortress left unsold as if consuming the potential future revenues with accumulated debt and an unpreventable current account deficit, while Montreux is being violated and foreign elements are being deployed at the corps level; in short, while the air is this foggy, and while we are also unhesitatingly taking sides in collective agreements with Arab countries in foreign relations in a meaningless way, and an incomprehensible power struggle contrary to the national will is being waged internally, let us hope that what we fear does not come to pass.