RYGA SUMMIT: NATO Must be Dismantled, and the Peace Dividend transferred to disarmament and development

Joan Russow
Global Compliance Research Project

Heads of State and Government from the 26 NATO member countries will meet in the Latvian capital Riga, from 28-29 November 2006, “to chart the way ahead for the Alliance’s operations, transformation and partnerships” (NATO press release, 2006).

The way ahead for the Alliance is to recognize that NATO has lost credibility, and has destabilized the world , and to begin the process of dismantling NATO.

The member states of NATO must (i) relocate their military budgets, and transfer the peace dividend to disarmament and development; (ii) withdraw from their bomb, brute and bribe Campaign in Afghanistan.

(A) REALLOCATION OF THE MILITARY BUDGET AND TRANSFER OF THE PEACE DIVIDEND

The right wing so-called Think tank, the Heritage Foundation expressed its alarm at “the disparity in defense expenditures between the United States on the one hand and Canada and Europe on the other. ….For the fiscal year 2007 defense budget, the United States has allocated $439.3 billion (3.2 percent of GDP) for the Department of Defense—an increase of 7 percent from FY 2006. This sum dwarfs the respective defense budgets of fellow NATO members: United Kingdom $65.25 billion (2.7 percent of GDP); France $45 billion (2.6 percent); Germany $30 billion (1.2 percent); Italy $28.2 billion (1.8 percent); Spain $9.9 billion (1.2 percent). Consequently, the United States now represents 85 percent of NATO’s military capabilities.” ( http://www.heritage.org).


The Heritage foundations ignores years of international commitments related to the reallocation of the global military budget:

In 1976 at Habitat 1, member states of the United Nations affirmed the following in relation to the military budget:

"The waste and misuse of resources in war and armaments should be prevented. All countries should make a firm commitment to promote general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, in particular in the field of nuclear disarmament. Part of the resources thus released should be utilized so as to achieve a better quality of life for humanity and particularly the peoples of developing countries" (II, 12 Habitat 1).

In 1981, in the General Assembly resolution entitled Resolution on the reduction of the military budget, the member states
(i) reaffirmed "the urgent need to reduce the military budget, and agreed to freeze and reduce the military budget";
(ii) recognised that "the military budget constitutes a heavy burden for the economies of all nations, and has extremely harmful consequences on international peace and security";
(iii) reiterated the appeal "to all States, in particular the most heavily armed States, pending the conclusion of agreements on the reduction of military expenditures, to exercise self-restraint in their military expenditures with a view to reallocating the funds thus saved to economic and social development, particularly for the benefit of developing countries" (Resolution on the Reduction of Military budgets, 1981).

These appeals were further reinforced in a 1983 General Assembly Resolution on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development, that curbing the arms build-up would make it possible to release additional resources for use in economic and social development, particularly for the benefit of the developing countries." Also in the 1993 resolution, member states considered that "the magnitude of military expenditures is now such that their various implications can no longer be ignored in the efforts pursued in the international community to secure the recovery of the world economy and the establishment of a new international economic order."

Also in 1992, all member states recognized that "Warfare is inherenly destructive of sustainable development" ( Rio Declarations. Principle 24, UNCED, 1992), and in Chapter 33, of Agenda 21, member states of the Untied Nations made a comitment to the "the reallocation of resources presenty commited to military purposes" (33.18e)

In 1994, in adopting the statement from the International Conference on Population and Development, the member states of the United Nations concurred that the attainment of “quantitative and qualitative goals of the present Programme of Action clearly require additional resources, some of which could become available from a reordering of priorities at the individual, national and international levels. However, none of the actions required—nor all of them combined— is expensive in the context of either current global development or military expenditures." (Article 1.19)
In the 1984 General Assembly Resolution entitled the Right of Peoples to Peace, there were "Appeals to all States and international organizations to do their utmost to assist in implementing the right of peoples to peace through the adoption of ...measures at both the national and the international level." (4. Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace approved by General Assembly resolution 39/11 of 12 November 1984)


Currently the Global Community spends more than 1 trillion dollars on the military budget at a time when many basic and fundamental rights have not been fulfilled: the right to affordable and safe housing; the right to unadulterated food (pesticide-free and genetically engineered-free food); the right to safe drinking water; the right to a safe environment; the right to universally accessible, not for profit health care; and the right to free and accessible education.

(B) NATO’S FLAWED BOMB, BRUTE AND BRIBE CAMPAIGN IN AFGHANISTAN

(i) NATO misconstrued article 51 of UN charter

In 2001, NATO States disregarded the UN Charter when they accepted the US misinterpretation of Article 51- self defence clause- as justification for the US act of revenge against Afghanistan.

(ii) NATO Mission Violates UN Charter by Failing to Fulfill UN Conditions
UN Security Council gave conditional support for the NATO’s International Security Force. This force was sanctioned in UN Security Council resolutions only if the force's actions were in keeping with the UN Charter. Under UN Charter, one of the purposes of the United Nations is the following:

"To establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained,...”

The NATO states has been found to have violated the Convention against Torture and they have yet to be assessed on their violation of Geneva Protocols on banned weapons systems such as Depleted uranium, and on their violation of international environmental instruments.

(iii) NATO Ignores Fundamental International Principle

Since 2001, most of the NATO countries have been belligerents in Afghanistan. The current "mission" described as a 3D - defense, development, and diplomacy- mission violates a fundamental international principle that a belligerent state should never be involved on the ground in reconstruction. NATO states are supporting a 3 B campaign: BOMB, BRUTE, and AND BRIBE OPERATION. Bombing a village, blasting in doors, brutally killing and wounding citizens and ignoring culture and then bribing with funds for reconstruction of hospitals to heal the victims are beyond any claims of legitimacy.

The principle of dissociation between militarism and development is stressed in the 1986 Declaration of the Right to Development:

In the Preamble to the Declaration states reaffirmed:
That there is a close relationship between disarmament and development and that progress in the field of disarmament would considerably promote progress in the field of development and that resources released through disarmament measures should be devoted to the economic and social development and well-being of all peoples and in particular , those of the developing countries. (Preamble, Declaration of the Right to Development)

(iv) NATO Using Machiavellian “Hearts and Minds” Strategy
nato supports the longstanding Vietnam strategy of attempting to win hearts and minds in order to obtain “intelligence”. Although there are irreversible environmental, social, and human rights consequences of the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, the only immediate recourse is for NATO to withdraw immediately, and be required to pay full compensation for damage and destruction of their invasion and occupation of Afghanistan.

(v) Undermining Sovereignty and Democracy of Member States of NATO
At the recent Quebec meeting of NATO. there was a resolution passed by the Defence Committee that “’in reference to Afghanistan Caveats must be removed”. The member states of NATO had previously voted in their respective assemblies and parliaments “caveats” which would limit the state’s participation in Afghanistan. The parliamentary Committee qualified the call for removal of caveats by passing a resolution calling for the removal of caveats that would interfere with the operation (a paraphrase of the resolution). NATO is contemplating pressuring the member states to remove the caveats that were voted on through the democratic process, and in doing so is proclaiming that NATO is above the sovereignty and democratic processes of member states.

C. NATO MUST CHART A WAY AHEAD

(i) Dismantle NATO and Re-allocate the Global Military budget for Disarmament and Development

Dismantle NATO, and re-allocate the 1 trillion dollar global military toward disarmament and development to ensure the fulfillment of basic human rights including: the right to affordable and safe housing; the right to unadulterated food (pesticide-free and genetically engineered-free food); the right to safe drinking water; the right to a safe environment; the right to universally accessible, not for profit health care; and the right to free and accessible education.

(ii) Withdraw from Afghanistan and set up International re-habilitation fund

NATO should embark on the immediate withdrawal of ISAF troops, and support an international fund for rehabilitation drawn from the payment of compensation for the damage caused to Afghanistan through the US-led Operation Enduring Freedom, and the NATO led International Security Assistance Force.