My long involvement with NATO began in 1980 with its extreme cold weather exercise, Anorak Express in Norway and took in the largest Dutch fighting troops tank exercise as well as major Reinforcement of Germany training such as Certain Strike and Iron Hammer. Cold War manoeuvres gave way to peace support operations in the Balkans, partnership for peace in Eastern Europe and security assistance in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. These were all primarily political deployments, albeit with strong military forces attached to the missions.
The misunderstanding that NATO is purely military stems largely from incorrect media sources such as Britannica and Wikipedia, which fail to explain that it is primarily a political alliance that uses military means as a last resort for the purpose of collective security. Even today, the BBC described NATO as a “military alliance”. This is dangerous on two counts. First, it panders to Putin’s version of the truth about the risks to Russia if Ukraine joins NATO. And second, it promotes the pretence that we can rely on others for our defence, rather than ensuring we have Armed Forces that are capable of operating independently for our own good.
Politics is all about perceptions and I have to admit that I hold a different view to the Secretary General about the “alliance of authoritarian powers” (which sounds like a rehash of the 2001 “axis of evil”). More than 50 countries have not supported the West in their recent foreign affairs’ decisions, including most of Africa and Asia. Does this mean that India, South Africa (and Brazil) are also enemies now, or are we the ones that are missing something?
NATO Allies In Action
Rupert Wieloch 