بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Question: A summit conference of the big countries and the NATO nations was held in the Portugese capital Lisbon on 19th and 20th November, 2010. It was announced that these countries have consented on a new strategy for the NATO alliance comprising crucial topics including the issue of Afghanistan, the topic of missile shield, relations with Russia as well as ratifications of broadening NATO's powers to go anywhere beyond its jurisdiction to areas where it sees a threat to itself. Is the United States serious on the subject of withdrawing from Afghanistan? What does it aim through the missile defence shield? Why does it want to entend NATO's authority? What is Russia's stance on all of this? Is the US in a position to dictate what it wishes to these countries? Can it strengthen its global standing?
Answer:
1: What is evident from the final communique of this summit as well from the statements regarding NATO's startegies in Afghanistan indicates its intentions to remain there permanently and that it regards the Afghanistan issue as vital to NATO. The Secretary General of NATO, Rasmosin declared: "We have agreed with President Hamid Karzai on a long-term partnership even after our combat duties". He added: "If the Taliban or any other movement hopes for our departure, then we forget [about leaving], then we will remain there as long as necessary to finish the job". (BBC: 20.11.2010). The communique issued at the end of the summit said: "[ it must be] emphasised that the Afghanistan assignment is a priority for NATO". Obama had demanded from the leaders participating at the Lisbon summit to "reensure their lasting commitment in Afghanistan". (Spanish newspaper El Pais, 19.11.2010). The German news agency reported on 20.11.2010 that it was expected to transfer authority over provincial matters to the Afghan side by the begining of July next year with the armed forces remaining under NATO's command to look after security in the most dangerous regions until 2014 and after that NATO will assume a supportive role". This indicates that the US wants to pretend as if it was withdrawing from secure regions i.e. those regions where the Mujahedeen are not offering intense resistance. This will demostrate to itself that it was complying with its own with its promises which were made by its president Obama that it will begin withdrawing its forces by July 2011. Thus the American and general public will be shown that the US has honoured its commitment, and also that America has achieved its objectives and it is on the verge of a final withdrawal. Nevertheless, the armed forces will remain there until 2014 in the most dangerous areas. Such is their commitment to their promise of withdrawal wherein Afghanistan remains under occupation until such time and even beyond it. The United States is pursuing the same policy that it did in Iraq in order to ensure that it retains a permanent role under the prestext of security pacts, strategic partnerships etc.. At this summit, the US exercised pressure over Europe to continue its support in Afghanistan. A large number of Europeans dislike the idea of siding with the US because Europe gains nothing from this war and all the gains and benefits going to America while the Europeans suffer from financial constraints and the people of Europe no longer see any benefit of continuing with this war.
2: As for the issue of NATO's relations with Russia, a summit was held between the NATO states and Russia and named NATO-Russia Meet where these relations between the two sides were discussed but it froze as a result of the Georgian crisis of August 2008. It wasannounced at this summit that the NATO states no longer considered Russai as NATO‘s enemy or that it poses any threat to it. This was NATO's first such statement and Russia was on the verge of a strategic partnership with the NATO alliance. The Russian President Medvedev stated: "The stage of coldness of their relations and mutual hostilities has come to an end between Russia and NATO". He added: "We look forward to the future with optimism and attempt to develop all round relations between Russia and the NATO". (Russia Today: 20.11.2010). However, the Russian president also pointed to the persisting differences between them such as the Gerogian issue, he said said with reference to it: "This conflict must be left behind". He also pointed other lingering differences without actually naming those, he said about these: "these should not result in cutting of relations". (Russia Today: 20.11.2010). The Russian President also stated: "Russia and the NATO states have agreed to resume dialogue over the European missile shield", and added: "the NATO states themselves cannot imagine the possible consequences on this shield...and therefore it should be a comprehensive plan rather than for one country it self or a group of countries to the exclusion of others". He also said: "that the emergence of a missile defence system a strong nuclear balance and therefore such a system must be sidelined because any change in the equilibrium would finally result in an arms race". (Russia Today: 20.11.2010). The paper also quoted Medvedev saying that Moscow has proposed what it called a (partial) system of missile defence, however the Russian president did not elaborate on the details of this proposal.
It is understood from the statements of the Russian president that as yet no final agreement has been reached between Russia and NATO on the missile shield and the issue of a partnership between them and that Russia is apprehensive over this. This is why the Russian president said that the NATO states themselves cannot imagine the consequenses of planting the missile shield. It appears that Medvedev was pointing to the European countries who do not realise that with the missile defence shield in place, they will be completely under American control and that this will result in a global conflict with security concerns returning to Europe. He pointed to fears of an arms race, which means that other countries with Russia being formeost among them, would workd to develop their weapons to meet the challenge of this new reality which the US has instigated, in order to defend themselves and confront America which dominates other countries. This is because fortified defences planted by the US would unnerve others to the extent of subjugating them to American policies.
Obama has acknowledged that he has not reached a final accord with Russia over this issue, he Said: "We have spent a lot of efforts to restore the realtionship between the US and Russia, and this is a process which has resulted in specific benefits to both sides. Now we are working to restore an arrangement of relations between NATO and Russia". Obama added: "We see Russia as a partner and not as rival, we have agreed to deepen our cooperation in a number of areas of which the missile defence shield is very important". (Russia Today: 20.11.2010). Thus Russia clearly did not get what it wished to and therefore the agreement did not materialise between NATO and Russia as well as between the US and Russia over the issues of the missile defence shield and of partnership, so it wants to keep the dialogue alive until it gets something of importance to it. Russia is keen on the agreement and does reject it outright, what is most important to it is being partner to the US in running the world affairs as it did during the erstwhile Soviet era so that it could again be regarded as a great power, since it does not want to be under America's supremacy, either by entering the NATO alliance or through some other route. Russia is keen to retain a distinguished identity of its own as a great country with its own and independent global policy. So Medvedev stated saying: "We either participate [in NATO] completely and exchange information and be charged with solving various problems, or do not participate at all. Russia will never accept being a mere adjunct nation within the NATO.and if we did not enter into it at all, then we will be forced to defend ourselves for obvious reasons". (France Presse: 21.11.2010). Medvedev had mentioned that: "while he did not see the possibility of Russia joining the NATO alliance, however he also does rule out oppurtunity of coming closer to a draft agreement between the two sides in case changes are made in the NATO and greater tranparency is achieved in the relationship between them". He also announced that Russia had agreed to transport trucks over its territories enroute to Afghanistan". (Russia Today: 20.11.2010).
Thus Russia has agreed to cooperate with the NATO countries to transport their equipment over its territories to Afghanistan. This is a free service being offered by Russia to the US as a means to achieve certain benefits at a time when it is getting nothing from America. If Russia sees that the situation in Afghanistan is conducive and in case NATO is defeated by the Mujahedeen, Russia can emerge as the challenger, but in case the US emerges victorious, Russia's influence in the Central Asia could challenge the US. So Russia has to take these various situations into consideration and also remind itself that it was the defeat it had faced in Afghanistan during the former Soviet Union era that brought America to the fore in the region. Thus it appears that the US wants to take everything from Russia without giving away anything in return except empty promises. America does does not want to involve Russia in solving global issues, it is only interested in involving Russia in tasks related to Russia service under the garb of partnership with NATO and not directly with America. Russia, on its part is not totally in the trap though it is hovering over the deceptive bait, and this because of its readiness to negotiations and its keenness to be a full partner!
3: As for the missile defence system, it is meant to achieve comprehensive hegemony of the United States over Europe which will be placed under its protection and permanent security apprehensions will be created so as to keep Europe always under America's firm grip and prevent it from ever becoming an independent power itself with which Europe could compete with the US. This will ensure that Europe neglects development its own military strength and even its nuclear arsenal to the extent of freezing it instead of further developing and modernising the arsenal. This is what France is fearful of and is attempting to prevent. This is why at their recent summit meeting held at the begining of this month i.e. on 2nd November, 2010, France has worked out an agreement with Britain to modernise their nuclear arsenal and develop atomic technology. The two sides have also agreed to to develop a joint military intervention force from their armed forces in order to have their own policy independent of the US and to serve their own interests away from American hegemony. But with what tranpired at the Lisbon summit and with Britain not opposing the US-proposed missile defence shield, certainly points to the weak stance of France & Britain and their despair at not being able to achive anything at the Lisbon summit which was clearly dominated by America.
Though the missile shield is being touted as a defensive system, but its contents are offensive and aimed at fighting the so-called ‘terror‘, ‘renegade‘ or ‘rogue‘ states and weapons of mass destruction as well as confronting threat of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. Thus through the NATO, United States has stressed upon the very policies that it has followed in this century especially after the events of September 11th, 2001 to which certain countries like France and Germany had been opposed to begin with as was Russia. However at the Lisbon summit, while the stance of France and Britain was considered, that of Russia had weakened and this is considered as victory for America which was given the mandate to pursue its policy of hostility. Thus Amercia's policies during the Bush era were unilateral and marked by non-agreement of others, however while America‘s current policies under Obama are simply an extension of his predecessor's era, but he pursues them by building a consensus.
4: As for the new plan and the new strategy which calls for expanding NATO's capabilities and extending its scope, they are meant to perpetuate NATO's existense which actually should have been dismantled when the very purpose for which it was created in the first place ceased to exist, i.e. after the communist Soviet Union and the Warsaw pact ceased to exist. However, NATO's existence is being given permanancy after making up new enemies and ‘creating‘ new threats for the NATO states. And although the summit did not actually talk about the presumed enemy or the objectives behind the missile shield, however their plans to base the missile defence in Turkey indicates that the objective is the Islamic region in order to prevent them from acquiring strength or establishing a Khilafah "Caliphate" in the region. This manifests the extent of the hatred and spite which the colonialist Kuffar have for Islam and Muslims, and it also shows how criminal will the Turkish rulers be with the missile shield installed there!
5: The conclusion is that the United States has been able to excercise its hegemony over the NATO countries at this summit and persisted with its resolve. This was especially truly over the western Europe which the US wants to keep under its protection in order to prevent Europe from becoming an independent power with its own independent force. America was also able to weaken Russia's opposition to its plans and none of the big countries stood against it so as to spoil or force it to redraft its papers again. In this way the United States has strengthened its position which had taken a beating as a result of the financial crisis as well as deteriorating situation in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition to this, expansion of NATO's capabilities and installing the missile shield in Turkey demostrates the extent of threat this summit poses on Islam and Muslims. In is imperative for Muslims to be aware of this threat and eliminate it with dedicated and concerted action to establish the Khilafah "Caliphate" which alone will repel the deception of the Kuffar colonialists, relegate them to their own perish, where their scheming will spell their own destruction. Allah will provide His help to those who help Him. He is All Powerful All-Mighty.