RPT - ANALYSIS - NATO Pushes For Russian Threat Rhetoric Or Risks Losing Raison D'etre Otherwise

MOSCOW (UrduPoint News / Sputnik - 27th June, 2020) NATO continues to fuel tensions by repeatedly warning of the so-called Russian threat because it allows the alliance to justify its high defense costs and because as soon as there is no longer any real or perceived threat on the horizon, the whole alliance will lose the very reason for its existence, experts told Sputnik.

Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg once again referred to the alleged threat from Russia in his opening statement at a video meeting of the alliance's defense ministers last week. He stressed that the strengthening of NATO's integrated air and missile defense systems is of major importance for the bloc.

"So NATO's job is to remain ready to defend all Allies against any threat. Today, we addressed Russia's extensive and growing arsenal of nuclear-capable missiles. And their implications for NATO's security," the NATO chief said.

The so-called Russian threat has become an indispensable part of NATO's rhetorical arsenal. It has subsequently been used as justification for the bolstering of the alliance's military presence near Russia's borders, in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland, over recent years.

Russia, however, has repeatedly warned that this military build-up could instigate a conflict, destabilize the region and lead to a global arms race. Moscow has also called upon the bloc to stop intimidating citizens of the United States and Europe by repeatedly emphasizing the non-existent Russian threat and exercise restraint in its rhetoric.

Moscow also pointed to the increased activities of NATO forces close to its border. Another such incident occurred earlier in June, when the Russian Defense Ministry registered heightened activity of US and NATO forces near its borders, including the Defender-Europe 20 military exercise and the first naval exercise in the Barents Sea since the end of the Cold War.

TRADITIONALIST FACTION STILL PERCEIVES RUSSIA AS MAJOR THREAT

After the Cold War ended, the globalists within NATO urged the bloc to concentrate more on global peace missions. However, amid the recent Ukraine crisis, the so-called traditionalists who continue to see Russia as the main threat to the alliance prevailed once again, Dr. Heinz Gaertner, a political scientist at the International Institute for Peace and the University of Vienna, told Sputnik.

"The traditionalist part sees still in Russia the main threat. This is also convenient because NATO is used to it and higher defense expenditures are easy to justify," the academic said.

Gaertner noted that the "Russian threat" may not be sufficient to keep NATO alive in the long run, and that's why Stoltenberg will turn to China. The NATO chief has repeatedly stressed that China's rising strength, its economic growth, and active foreign policy should not be overlooked by the alliance.

"With mentioning Russia still as a threat he [Stoltenberg] keeps the traditionalists and East Europeans happy. After all, he needs to legitimate NATO's request for more defense spending from its members," Gaertner said, noting that the Russian threat "is always good reasoning" for NATO.

Professor Biljana Vankovska from the Security and Peace Department at the Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje stressed while speaking to Sputnik that the very existence of NATO is, in fact, based on the premise of an existing enemy.

"Once there is no (real, perceived or fabricated) threat on the horizon, NATO will lose its raison d'etre.

So Stoltenberg is just doing (i.e. keeping his job). NATO is trying to make a case before its member-states' public for sustaining the military bloc. Russia has served the purpose for quite some time," Vankovska explained.

The bloc is currently in disarray predominantly as a result of the situation in the US, she said, adding that Stoltenberg has to preserve the reputation of the alliance.

MORE NATO'S SPOKESPERSON THAN CHIEF

At the conference last week, Stoltenberg announced that the West would "not mirror Russia's destabilising behaviour," adding that the alliance had "no intention to deploy new land-based nuclear missiles in Europe".

However, Gaertner said that such a statement by the NATO chief can be interpreted in many different ways.

"It means only now and this can change. NATO can always find a reason if Russia is deploying new, different missile systems. NATO keeps its options open to deploy medium-range territorial missiles, and that's why NATO did not oppose Trump's withdrawal from the INF [Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces] Treaty," he explained.

According to Vankovska, taking into account the recent complex situation with COVID-19 and relations with Washington, Stoltenberg resembles a "spokesperson" rather than the leader of the bloc.

"The deployment of land-based nuclear missiles (and/or manpower) depends on US priorities rather than on the alliance's plans. In my mind, the situation is unstable and it is hard to predict what the officials truly plan," she said.

EUROPE BECOMING LESS IMPORTANT?

Apart from Russia, this month the NATO allies are largely discussing US President Donald Trump's plan to reduce the number of US troops in Germany.

After nearly a week of speculation in the media in the wake of a Wall Street Journal report about the troops' withdrawal, Trump confirmed last week that he wanted to pull 9,500 soldiers from Germany to reduce the count to 25,000, after accusing the German government of being "delinquent" in its defense spending.

Stoltenberg admitted that the US presence in Germany was "a bilateral issue between the United States and Germany" that was, at the same time, "a matter that is important for all Allies." However, the secretary general stated that no final decision was made "on how and when" to implement the US plan.

Reacting to the NATO leader's comments, Gaertner said that Stoltenberg has always been eager to demonstrate that the transatlantic link between Europe and the alliance remains strong.

"Sure, he is not fond of the announced US troop withdrawal from Germany. After all, he cannot deny that Europe is becoming less important for the US. China is on the radar of the US," the researcher said.

Gaertner pointed to Washington's sufficient power projection capabilities which mean that Germany is not indispensable as a logistical base for the middle East anymore.

A number of US military bases in Germany, including Ramstein Air Base, act as logistics staging posts for armed forces operations in eastern Europe, Africa and the Middle East.

Meanwhile, Vankovska said that without US involvement, there is no NATO.

"Obviously, Mr. Trump is still insisting that his European partners (and particularly Germany) purchase more American-manufactured weapons and/or increasing the budget share for defense/military purposes," she concluded.