How should we view NATO today?

Founded in Washington on April 4, 1949, by 12 founding countries, NATO has expanded over time to reach 32 member states today. Given that there is no effective communist organization today, how should we view NATO? While the slogans of the Warsaw Pact, established 6 years after NATO, included "friendship, cooperation, and mutual assistance," NATO's actions have been quite dark. Perhaps this difference is enough to reveal the divide between capitalism and communism. 

NATO, which was put into operation to protect the capitalist world against the communist world, restricted the freedom of thought and choice of the capitalist world with its founding philosophy. Historical dynamics, which can determine and reverse the choices of humanity and societies through interesting events and processes, are at work here as well. It is not fate that capitalist reflexes were activated when the collapse experienced due to the destruction of war brought capitalist Europe face-to-face with the most powerful structure of the communist world; it is the result of capitalism's protective reflexes.

The conductor of this organization is the USA, which took over the flag from England after the Second World War and is in the position of leader of the new world. In short, the emergence and continuity of NATO is, in the communism-capitalism confrontation that represented world domination at the time, a means to round up the capitalist bloc under the guise of defense, to ban and suppress the idea and thought of communism under the guise of defense, and thus to maintain the exploitative order on earth. The most painful tragedy of this suppression was the execution of the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg family in the electric chair in 1953, based on a verdict reached through a fabricated espionage charge.

His Excellency Trump also supposedly did not want to attend the meeting in Turkey at first, but came for Erdoğan's sake! While this emotional, polite behavior of Trump brings tears to our eyes, it also provides legitimacy to the administration we need so much! I think it was around 2020, when Trump argued that NATO should be expanded to include the security of the Middle East with the NATOME project, it is no longer a mystery how much he meant the Greater Middle East Project!

It is certain that while China wants to reach out to the Middle East, blocking this project will be one of the main goals of NATOME. In addition, it is inevitable that ensuring the smooth implementation of the goals of expanding Israel without encountering any problems, in addition to its current security, will be within the NATOME project. As for who Israel will crush while expanding its coverage area, that will of course remain outside the scope of NATOME's interest! 

With its military and political aspects, NATO is now an organization known to everyone. NATO, which is introduced and perceived as a collective defense organization, is in essence an ideological, repressive, and terror-inducing organization. It is an organization for the dissemination and protection of a specific ideology and the prevention, or even destruction, of opposing activities through various means such as persuasion, blackmail, threats, and even scholarships and seminars. Turkey sending a force of 4,500 to Korea to join NATO, the restriction of its freedom regarding the air defense system it purchased from Russia, and the fact that it cannot remain neutral in operations NATO enters are very serious constraints, as are the bases that prevent the country's neutrality. NATO scholarships are methods of ideological influence and suppression. Is the project of Ukraine fighting Russia a momentary event, or is it the result of a long-term planned operation? It is not very clear!    

It is clear that in a world divided as communist-capitalist, it was not very possible to imagine a neutral defense organization. In these environments, ideological suppression becomes inevitable. In this case, the only way out for countries is full neutrality.

Neutrality in the Cold War era of the past and neutrality in today's conditions, where the stones are tied and the dogs are unleashed, can be quite different. Contrary to the bloc structures of the past, a structure of central states prevails today. In this case, despite the ideological-systemic expansion of the past, today there may be goals of reaching and protecting valuable minerals or natural resources.

However, there is a significant difference between the conditions of the past and the conditions of today: while the exploitative relationship between countries in the past was established through politics, diplomacy, and even military power, today's exploitation is established through much more subtle and vague international capital activities.

In short, for today's exploitation networks, there is no need to form an alliance, nor is there a need to step outside the networks to get rid of them. Today's exploitation networks are introduced into countries through international capital networks, packaged in trade and even aid. Instead of discussing today's NATO with its nearly century-old founding philosophy, it should be handled in the conditions of the day. The organization, which was in the position of a war organization between political blocs in the past, has taken on the character of an organization for the struggle between central countries over currency and economic spheres of influence in today's conditions. We can also see today's NATO as a covert defense organization for international capital groups circulating the world in the neoliberal system against a reactive local attack that may occur in the future.