Susanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism
April 26, 2013
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Police Operational Mentor and Liaison Team (POMLT) combines police forces from over 20 countries to “coach, teach, mentor, provide the conduit for liaison, and when necessary, support the operational planning and employment of the ANP unit to which they are aligned in order to support the development of a professional, sufficient and self-sustaining ANP.”
This year, NATO facilitated an airstrike against the CIA – created Taliban in Ghazni, Afghanistan. It was confirmed by local authorities that “”The NATO planes went there to assist the police, but the post was bombed and four police were killed. Two civilians present were also killed.”
Because of the rise of the BRICs nations, the NATO believes that countries will need to rely on this international police force “to manage a range of threats and challenges.”
The perception of the international community is that the BRICs nations are “torn internally between accepting the status quo . . . only if their power in the institution is increased; or trying to fashion a new system altogether.”
While the Chinese are recognized as having more “blue hats” than any other rising super power and “becoming increasingly involved in global police work” NATO sees this nation as lacking “the willingness or wherewithal to take responsibility” to take care of themselves.
Global cooperation is encouraged with natural resources such as food and water; as well as combating climate change and “the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction” as the temperament of relations between nations becomes more “problematic”.
In recent years, NATO has grown into a “UN-US crafted attempt to build history’s first, first of all largest military bloc of 28 members, with 3 nuclear powers – nothing like this has ever existed before.”
Andres Fogh Rasmussen, secretary general of NATO, travelled to South Korea with Alexander Vershbow, command deputy secretary general of NATO to “openly discussed the possibility of invoking article 5 of the mutual military assistance clause against N. Korea in the event of conflict between the two countries.”
In 2011, then US Defense Secretary Robert Gates admonished the US government for “willing and eager for American taxpayers to assume the growing security burden left by reductions in European defense budgets.”
Gates acknowledged that with the US contributing $711.8 million to NATO operations in foreign nations translates to 1/5 to ¼ of NATO’s overall budget.
Andrew Bacevich, professor at Boston University, commented that the US spends more on NATO than “all other nations on the planet combined.”
According to the Congressional Budget Service, in 2009 – 2010 the US government, through the Department of the Army’s Operations and Maintenance account, provided between $408 million and $431 million.
The 2012 Department of Defense (DoD) Military Construction Program and Budget (MCPB) document shows a contribution to funding for NATO surveillance programs and intelligence operations, mobility, logistics with a focus on transportation and infrastructure.
The US contributed $282 million to NSIP under the guise of ongoing military operations that seek to preserve peace while NATO itself as focused its efforts on national politics and economics.
This money has resulted in the redirection of the NATO Security Investment Program (NSIP) activities, supporting European bases and US facilities, financing Pentagon missions such as Desert Storm and training allocated civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq. Defense and private sector corporations have been given NSIP contracts to keep the flow of resources increasing funding for the use of this global police force.
John Kerry, US Secretary of State, said that NATO should become an active force in Syria against the current governmental powers.
Kerry stated: “We should also carefully and collectively consider how NATO is prepared to respond to protect its members from a Syrian threat, including any potential chemical weapons threat.”
Chuck Hagel, Secretary of Defense, remarked that the US is not convinced that the assertions that the Syrian government is engaged in and has access to chemical weapons.
Jay Carey, press secretary for the White House confirmed Hagel’s statement when he explained that there is no infallible evidence that the Syrian government is actively using chemical weapons.
On a recent trip to Abu Dhabi, Hagel told reporters that he has received letters from the White House that claim “our intelligence community does assess, with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically, the chemical agent sarin.”
Kerry spoke from Washington, DC to confirm that there was “intelligence” stating that on 2 instances, Syria used chemical weapons, although when this was or whether there were casualties was not mentioned.
This new development is the perfect excuse to attack Syria, as Obama has said that the use of chemical weapons would be a “game-changer”.
