How NATO's Washington summit fans confrontation and sabotages peace

Leaders participating in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit pose for a group photo in Washington, D.C., the United States, July 9, 2024. (NATO/Handout via Xinhua)

"Questions about NATO's purpose began as soon as the Soviet Union broke up," Walt said. "Predictions that open-ended expansion eastward would lead to a Europe that was 'whole, free, and at peace' look rather hollow today."

BEIJING, July 13 (Xinhua) -- The recently concluded Washington summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has aroused a wave of harsh criticism from politicians and scholars from the bloc's member states and other countries, who said the alliance has become more confrontational and less of a guardian of global peace.

Stephen Walt, the Robert and Renee Belfer professor of international relations at Harvard University, wrote an opinion piece in Foreign Policy titled, "This time, NATO is in trouble for real."

While NATO celebrates its 75th anniversary, Walt noted the dark clouds casting shadows over the fest, including the rise of far-right forces in Europe, the division between Europe and the United States over the Ukraine crisis, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the regulation of digital technologies, among others.

"Questions about NATO's purpose began as soon as the Soviet Union broke up," Walt said. "Predictions that open-ended expansion eastward would lead to a Europe that was 'whole, free, and at peace' look rather hollow today."

The columnist challenged trans-Atlantic solidarity: "Europe and the United States are gradually drifting apart, and the only important question is how fast it will happen and how far it will go."

Meanwhile, many politicians and observers from NATO's European members voiced their discontent and disagreement over the alliance's antagonism towards certain countries and a shift from the original function it was built to serve.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban posted on social media that NATO must focus on winning peace rather than engaging in wars. He was posting from Washington, where he attended the summit earlier this week.

"NATO was established 75 years ago to protect the security of its members. However, it now seems to be moving away from its original goal, increasingly behaving like a war organization," Orban said in a video posted on his official Facebook page.

He said that this shift is demonstrated in NATO's increasingly active role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. "We believe this is dangerous -- even irresponsible, because no one can see where this will lead or where we will end up."

Uros Lipuscek, a Slovenian political scientist, said that NATO is trying to advance in the Pacific region.

Attacks on sovereign countries outside the member area, unwavering support for illegal and illegitimate interventions by the United States, the expansion of NATO contrary to the agreements in such a way that it threatens Russia -- all this has nothing to do with the basic goals of the NATO alliance, but became the dominant direction of development of this increasingly aggressive union, he said.

Slovenian politician and former member of the European Parliament Aurelio Juri wrote on X that NATO's sole purpose should be to maintain peace, not endless war.

"Perhaps we will finally understand that our entry into NATO in 2004 was not the wisest choice," Juri said, adding that membership in NATO "threatens our security rather than protects it."

Mladen Plese, a Croatian political analyst, said that NATO should focus on preserving peace and preventing conflicts rather than starting or getting involved in wars and military conflicts around the world, as it has done in recent years under the guidance of the United States.

"The United States has used NATO to implement its policies and has a decisive influence on NATO; this is not good for the European partners. NATO must not be an extended arm of Washington, and more and more European countries are warning about this," Plese said.

"NATO is being used in the name of American interests to tighten the situation in the Asia-Pacific region, which does not correspond to the interests of Europe at all," Plese added.

Officials and experts further criticized the U.S. dominance over the bloc, saying the country has been turning the alliance into an extended arm to maintain global hegemony.

NATO is one of the "institutional frameworks" in the U.S. military-security apparatus that underpin the U.S. grand strategy, Jeffrey Sachs, a professor and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, told Xinhua.

"The United States continues to have a foreign policy that is profoundly misguided and dangerous, based on the goal of hegemony, and with the consequence of confrontation with China, Russia, and most of the developing countries. NATO is part of this misguided and dangerous foreign policy," Sachs said.

Russian Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov noted the Washington summit "showed that NATO has irrevocably embarked on the path of confrontation and material preparation for war."

"The United States and its satellites are mobilizing maximum resources to preserve their collapsing hegemony," Antonov said in the Telegram channel of the Russian Embassy in the United States. "Enemies are being declared as anyone who refuses to submit to the dictates and will of the West."

Antonov added that Europe alone is not enough for NATO, with the alliance's interests extending beyond the Euro-Atlantic region, primarily to Asia.

"It is important to emphasize that the outcome of the 'humanitarian' interventions by this allegedly defensive bloc is well-known -- the destruction of states, war crimes, the rise of extremism, and the mass death of civilians."