A stunning 4,000-word interview of Mark Rutte, the head of NATO, was published by the New York Times on July 5th, which received stunningly little attention in the U.S.-and-allied press; and, in it, he made clear that NATO has nothing to do with democracy versus dictatorship, but is entirely about increasing military spending — just as-if it were controlled by whomever the top investors in those corporations are. He also made clear that NATO will be expanding beyond the existing North Atlantic Treaty Organization because it will increasingly be focusing upon also “the Indo-Pacific” in order to ‘defend’ not only against Russia but increasingly against China (though that isn’t in the “North Atlantic” region). Highlights from that shocking interview will be posted here at the end, but first will be presented the broader perspective in which to understand the reason why NATO continued on after 1990 and even greatly increased its size after communism and its NATO-mirror Warsaw Pact, and the Soviet Union itself (its alleged enemy), all ended in 1991 so that NATO’s previously alleged very raison d’etre, its reason-for-being — protecting against communism and the Soviet Union — had terminated (though NATO went on expanding, thereby proving the lies of its founders).
The crucial moment in this matter (disproving the lies of its founders) occurred on 24 February 1990 when U.S. President GHW Bush privately and secretly told West Germany’s leader, Helmut Kohl that all of the U.S. team’s verbal promises to Gorbachev that if the Soviet Union and its communism and its Warsaw Pact would end, then NATO wouldn’t take advantage of that by expanding up to the very borders of Russia so as to repeat what Hitler had tried to do in his Operation Barbarossa: blitz-invading Russia to conquer and absorb it. Bush’s Secretary of State James Baker famously said on 9 February 1990 that “We understand the need for assurances to the countries in the East. If we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east.” And, then, privately, President Bush himself, personally at Camp David, two weeks later, on 24 February 1990, responded to Kohl’s understanding that this was the U.S. position, by telling him, “To hell with that. We prevailed and they didn't. We cannot let the Soviets clutch victory from the jaws of defeat.” Bush equated peace with Russia, to being defeat by Russia. The U.S., Bush was telling Kohl, must succeed at doing what Hitler’s Operation Barbarossa had failed to do: defeat and absorb into its empire Russia. He also told Kohl, on that same day, “We have weird thinking in our Congress today, ideas like this peace dividend. We can't do that in these uncertain times.” Kohl (and the other U.S. stooges, such as France’s Mitterrand, whom Bush likewise told this after him) obeyed. They all kept silent and cooperated with the U.S. Government’s plan. (The plan had actually been decided upon by President Truman on 25 July 1945.)