When the Nato warmongers first began to prepare for their Lithuanian jamboree in July, hopes ran high amongst the credulous – especially those whose evaluation of the Ukraine war’s likely outcome rested more on Hollywoodised western propaganda narratives than on troublesome facts about armies, artillery shells, air cover and the like.
Surely, with the long-awaited Ukrainian ‘counteroffensive’ finally under way, backed up by a seemingly unceasing stream of lethal weaponry pouring into Kiev’s lap from all over Europe and with every western government parroting the solemn vow to ‘Stand With Ukraine’, Nato would now strike whilst the iron was hot and welcome UkraineUkraine into the thieves’ den to universal acclaim.
But by the time the thieves finally gathered in Vilnius on 11 and 12 July, it was glaringly obvious that there was precious little to celebrate.
Failure is an orphan
The ‘counteroffensive’ on which the collective west had staked so much turned out to be a non-event, and when the smoke had cleared Nato stood revealed as a house radically divided against itself, with as many views on what to do with Ukraine as there were participants in the conference.
This uncertainty in direction for the alliance was reflected in its difficulty choosing a new leadership that can speak with a united voice.
Failing to pick a new frontman (or, even better, frontwoman), a reluctant-looking Jens Stoltenberg had to be been hauled back in to serve a third term, in the forlorn hope that his ‘safe pair of hands’ will enable the bickering crew to muddle through the current crisis. (Britain’s defence secretary Ben Wallace put his own hat in the ring but was roundly rejected, leading to a string of bitter recriminations in the British media.)
The final communique from the assembled heads was a masterpiece of obfuscation and self-contradiction. While restating that Nato’s ultimate goal is still to accept Ukraine into the club, it in the next breath declined to name the day when any such invitation might actually arrive, muttering that Kiev might get its invite (or just the bare promise of one) “when Allies agree and conditions are met”.
Jam tomorrow, in fact.
Don’t you know there’s a war on?
Heaven forfend that Nato might be obliged by the terms of its constitution (Article 5) to come to the aid of one of its members! Clearly, the prospect of committing themselves to full-scale open warfare with Russia and shifting the front line closer to home is not one that sits well with the imperialists just now.
In short, Nato will be happy to honour the promises it made to Ukraine back in 2008, just so long as they do not relate to the actual war unfolding now – a war promoted, armed and bankrolled by Nato. By all means, go ahead and prevail against Russia if you can, but if you cannot, don’t come knocking at Nato’s door and waving Article 5.
Pressure on Nato to deliver a precise and unambiguous roadmap towards accession came most sharply from Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states, all controlled by proxy governments that are eager to nail down the USA on its airy promises of rewards for services rendered.
Meanwhile, neither Washington nor Berlin are keen to become directly bogged down in a war they cannot win, although they are happy to keep throwing ‘disposable’ east Europeans into the trenches in the hopes that something might come along to rescue the whole endeavour if they can just keep the conflict going for long enough.
Imperialism has no permanent friends
Ukrainian puppet actor-president Volodymyr Zelensky and the fascist junta in Kiev have every reason to denounce Anglo-Saxon imperialism for its treacherous double-dealing.
The USA and Britain egged on the Maidan fascists, supported the pogroms in the Donbass, encouraged Kiev to tear up the Minsk accords, actively dissuaded Zelensky from finding an early resolution to the conflict, and throughout it all continued to pour weapons into the Ukraine.
It did all this, and then Nato turned around at the Vilnius conference and told Zelensky effectively: Sorry, you can’t join Nato because we notice you are in the middle of a war.
Or, as one commentator neatly summed it up: “Nato is now using the very war it has done everything to fuel as a pretext to stop Ukraine from joining the alliance”. (Nato isn’t defending Ukraine. It’s stabbing it in the back by Jonathan Cook, Middle East Eye, 14 July 2023)
The proxy ‘president’ recently dubbed by Scott Ritter as ‘Agent Zelensky’ will now take his place in the long and winding queue of jilted imperialist stooges, cast aside as surplus to requirements – like the sad turncoats helicoptering off the US embassy in Saigon and the collaborating translators and fixers stranded in Afghanistan as pet dogs caught the last plane out.