• hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    “If NATO was created to guarantee peace and mutual defense, it must either become an organization that takes on this task by engaging with the Global South — and thus become something profoundly different — or we will not achieve the goal of having security within rules that apply to everyone,” he said.

    It was created to guarantee peace and mutual defense in Europe. Why would NATO have to “engage with the Global South” (whatever the fuck that means in this context) to do that?

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Europe AND North America.
      Nuclear war was as much a threat against North America as it was against Europe.
      USA was also attacked by Japan in WW2, so USA too could conceivably be attacked again.

      EU was to created in huge part to maintain peace in Europe.

      • hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Well, NATO was pretty much built to counter a Soviet invasion of Europe – so even though Art. 5 does cover the US (and they’re the only ones to have invoked it so far to justify their bullshit war in Afghanistan) since they’re a member state, the organisation has always been more geared towards keeping Russia from invading Europe.

  • Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    It really seems like he doesn’t understand what a “defense alliance” is meant to accomplish.