My analysis of the beginnings of cracks in NATO had been published with a short delay, just enough to become obsolete. I pointed to the two referendum initiatives in Slovenia -one on military spending and the other on membership in the Alliance-, when the situation swiftly changed. To the surprise of those not well acquainted with the political situation in this small country, the Slovenian parliament annulled the decision on the first referendum proposed by the coalition partner Levica on procedural grounds: the referendum question was allegedly not properly formulated! This gave Prime Minister Robert Golob a perfect excuse to withdraw his own hasty and emotionally provoked proposal for a second referendum (asking whether citizens were in favor of remaining in or withdrawing from NATO). It seems that hopes for a genuine debate in any country about NATO’s senseless, or rather suicidal demand for 5% of the GDP to be allocated to military purposes have evaporated. As the old Latin saying goes: Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. (The mountain labors and brings forth a mouse).
Slovenian colleagues that I consulted still argue that the referendum saga is not over, as the proposer(s) can still ‘correct’ the question and call for a new referendum. However, some grounded observers point out that such an initiative would be for a consultative referendum, i.e. non-binding, meaning that even if it created public debate, it would remain just a storm in a teacup – with no real legal or political effect.
Let us recall that, under pressure and fearmongering, Slovenians voted in favor of joining NATO in 2003,with 66% of support. That referendum was binding, and therefore, no consultative one could be strong enough to legally override it. a. In other words, the people were already asked once, and Slovenia checked into Hotel California. Are new generations allowed to check out of Hotel NATO? Is there enough critical mass and awareness to leave this military club, insatiable like Leviathan, demanding ever more money and troops? Because Europe today is preparing for war, not for peace. We shall see what happens in this small country, whose people are known for not being particularly enthusiastic about wearing military boots or paying for them.
Despite this twist in Slovenia, NATO’s internal fractures are far from over. Formally, there is an exit clause regulated by Article 13 of the NATO Charter – all that is required is sending an official notification to the US State Department announcing a country’s intent to withdraw. The “divorce” takes 12 months. It sounds deceptively easy, but the real question is whether any democratically elected government, even with a mandate to do so, would dare or be allowed to act according to its voters’ demands. Are NATO member states, especially the smaller ones, truly sovereign? Just look at how even this small episode in Slovenia rattled Brussels, Washington, and the Western media. Leaving NATO, or merely disagreeing with Donald Trump’s demands, is treated as blasphemy and drama. Few will say it openly, but Foreign Minister Tanja Fajon was under immense pressure in recent weeks and was forced to swear loyalty to NATO. Sadly, in Slovenia, anti-NATO or anti-war forces are either small in number within parliament or exist mostly within civil society.
Yet cracks in NATO do exist. Some are visible, others less so. Spain has quietly secured an opt-out clause, but it is only a matter of time before other member states want to “become Spain.” The current focus is on Slovakia and its brave Prime Minister Fico (unlike Slovenia’s Golob, who merely frightened the public without any serious intention to advocate for a NATO exit). Nearly half of Slovakia’s population favors neutrality (49.8%) over staying in NATO (40%). In the neighbourhood, the Czech opposition leader and former prime minister Andrej Babis said his ANO party would reject NATO’s new defence spending goal if it wins October’s election. “If Trump says that I have to jump from the window, I will not jump.”
Italy firmly refuses to pay for new arms purchases for Ukraine or to send troops to the front. Croatia’s president admits his country cannot satisfy NATO’s endless appetite. Many countries hesitate to commit further to military engagements against Russia (which, of course, is portrayed as the main threat without evidence). In Italy, public opinion polls show only 16% of young people are willing to go to war to defend their country. The situation is similar in Britain, where over 70% of young people don’t even know how to change a lightbulb in their living room. Perhaps today’s generations lack awareness of the horrors of Europe’s two world wars. Yet many have enjoyed decades of peace and prosperity thanks to economic ties with Russia and cheap energy. Within them lies the untapped potential to say NO to militarism and the military uniforms their governments are preparing for them.
Here is another important fact to keep us from despair and passivity: every new cent spent on the military-industrial complex deepens the social crisis. Some deranged minds believe military spending is the salvation for capitalism’s crisis of self-cannibalisation, but money does not fall from the sky. Ukraine, Germany, and others do not have bottomless funds for weapons and military exercises. War is an expensive business and has never brought progress. Europe is draining itself to death by repeating mistakes it paid for dearly in the past. And US citizens will not fare better under Trump’s reckless strategy of creating vassals and enemies without meeting the expectations of his electorate.
Despite NATO’s global expansion, it remains a paper tiger militarily. It cannot prepare for so many simultaneous confrontations, nor will it find enthusiasm among its citizens. Trump’s policy of extortion and blackmail has its limits, just like his tariff madness.
Our task is to reveal the cracks in the fractured shell of this emerging militarism and to resist the fear that it harbors an Alien-like monstrosity -like in the film series. If a new Nazism emerges -its contours already visible -we, the inhabitants of NATOland, will be its first victims – followed by our manufactured enemies.
---
This article was produced by Globetrotter. Biljana Vankovska is a professor of political science and international relations at Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, a member of the Transnational Foundation of Peace and Future Research (TFF) in Lund, Sweden, and the most influential public intellectual in Macedonia. She is a member of the No Cold War collective
This article was produced by Globetrotter. Biljana Vankovska is a professor of political science and international relations at Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, a member of the Transnational Foundation of Peace and Future Research (TFF) in Lund, Sweden, and the most influential public intellectual in Macedonia. She is a member of the No Cold War collective
Comments