Rambler's Top100


Some of these menaces ware real , some exaggerated or simply -fictions but however Americans succeed in their attempts to show them as reasons which are enough for the continuation of the American presence on the European shores of the Atlantic ocean . Because America is naval , not continental power ,except the Atlantic in the whole "defense " structure has been incorporated Mediterranean sea with maritime Mediterranean countries .This moves resulted with the creating of the clear contours of of North Atlantic alliance which are involving the both shores of the Atlantic ocean and Mediterranean Sea which can be count in this American strategy of guarding of Europe and penetrating to the East as the gulf of the Atlantic . But it is interesting that NATO was strictly Euro-American alliance. Nether American puppet states from the western hemisphere,nor the Asian countries like Iran or Iraq didn't become NATO members . They created the whole system of the alliances from CENTO in Central Asia , SEATO in South East Asia to ANZUS pact in the south Pacific .All this alliances are characterized by gerographicly,military and political specific elements of their member states .Contrary to unstable social structures of the Asian allies ,European or more precisely Northatlantic allies proved themselves as successful recipients of the American system of democracy ,human rights and market economy ,even surpassing their own transatlantic teachers.If we have in mind that the most of them are commercial and maritime nations there wasn't any big surprise because of the accepting of the values which ware for a long time indivisible part of Dutch or English history.

In fact these maritime ,commercial states represents archetype of the contemporary American maritime atlantist civilization.In the words on American annalist Michael Lind in his text "Toward the global society of the states " published in August 2002 in "The Wilson Quarterly " : "...There is no contradiction between this kind of limited and incidental strategic imperialism, which has permitted the United States to take part in global power struggles by using overseas military bases, and the principled hostility of American leaders to attempts by the European powers and Japan to divide most of the earth's inhabitants and resources among a small number of autarkic empires. Precedents for America's oceanic web of ports, canals, coaling stations, and airfields can be found in the maritime empires created by such older commercial republics as Venice and the Netherlands..." In fact Americans couldnt establish strict imperial order because they are not continental civilization,not because of their moral principles.Here they are following the historical examples of the maritime civilizations from Carthage,to the Netherlands and Venice .The Atlantist and Mediterranean countries ,members of EU and NATO are following the same maritime-commercial archetypes ,in much longer period then the USA. Because of that it is not difficult for them to "accept " the so could western ,in fact atlantist values and to involve them in their own social structure .It is different situation in the central and eastern Europe where strong continental traditions are opposing to atlantist values and because of that Americans have different approach in this part of the continent.

It is the same case of promoting "western" values even with Turkey ,which is more then 8 decades (with the reforms of Ataturk )on it's way of westernization of society and introducing of capitalist economy like in any other western society ..The lack of the respect for the basic human rights is the result of the transformation of a traditional society to a kind of modern ,western type society . There ware similar problems in Spain and Portugal ,but nobody ever questioned their loyalty to the west .The whole process of their westernization was finished with their acceptance as EU members .Because in the case of Turkey there are bigger civilization and cultural differences it should be expected longer process then it was the case with Spain and Portugal,but the final aim and the final result would be the same . It just shows that so could "western" values do not have anything in common with western civilization but contrary to that they are product of the atlantist civilization which is antiwestern and antieuropean in all of its main aspects.

American (atlantist ) geopolitician D.Maning in his work "Heartland and Rimland in Eurasian history " published in 1956 shows the atlantist point of view on the geopolitical essence of the different lands and regions of Europe and Eurasia .He writes : "...China,Mongolia,North Wietnam,Afghanistan,East Europe( including Prussia ),Baltic lands and Karelia are the regions with organic orientation toward the heartland
South Korea ,Burma,India,Iraq,Siria,Yugoslavia are geopolitical neutral
West Europe,Greece,Turkey,Iran,Pakistan,Thailand have predisposition toward the talasocratic bloc. ..* "
As we can see Turkey is essential atlantist,pro talasocratic country and it is the main reason for its acceptance in the "western" civilization circle.

These intellectual remarks found their realization in the reality with creating talasocratic blocs ,involving there countries like Greece (NATO ) ,Turkey (NATO and CENTO),Iran (CENTO),Thailand (SEATO) but also in the attempts to attract the so could geopolitical "neutral" countries in these atlantic creations like Yugoslavia (with the creating of the antisoviet Balkan pact between Yugoslavia,Greece and Turkey in 1953 ) or Iraq ( with its involvement in CENTO ) .The final destiny of these two geopolitical "neutral " countries can show the real intentions of the Atlantist with their continental partners.But also the brave resistance of strictly continental North Vietnam can be example of the positive understanding of geopolitical essence of continental states. In the partition made by D.Maning North Vietnam belongs to the same group as China, East Europe and Prussia - the regions with organic orientation toward the hearthland.We can add - the regions with traditionalist civilization which is in total oposition with Anglo-American atlantist bloc. They already have the potentials. They just need a kind of mental,intelectual revolution to achieve to realize their geopolitical potentials . .

Americans achieved to realize their success from 1945 with the creation of NATO .There troops ware already in Germany,Italy , even in Greece , and the creation of NATO was in fact political and legislative form , a kind of legalization of the situation which was already existing on the ground . However contrary to the Warsaw pact , NATO didn't have firm,compact imperial characteristics. Americans established and maintained their control through the whole range of diversions from inteligence to political and economic. The intervention in Greece is the only clear example of the classical military intervention but it was realized before the creation of NATO at all . Also there ware plans for the US intervention in Italy but the "solution" was found through the CIA sabotage ,like in the case of France where Americans ware creating successful cooperation with the local mafia elements with the main aim of destabilizing the society and its efforts and struggle for more independence . Except this kind of sabotage Americans ware using economic pressures and blackmails.They ware using the desperate dependence of the French people on the American food supplies to create a kind of obedience and to destroy the potential existence of the independent elements.Because there wasn't total control ,especially not under the countries which didn't participate in the second world war like Spain and Turkey in the first period of its existence NATO was a kind of alliance of free countries -partners, more a cooperation of similar north atlantic regimes united in their efforts to realize particular values and to press out their political opponents. The realization of the "western " values , and the deployment of US troops like the guardians of these values , was the main task of NATO partners in this period.


This conception is changing essentially with the victory in the cold war. The Washington strategists need some time to create new strategy which would supported military and political spreading toward east .Here we should emphasize that EU played the role of the logistical support to this spreading in the first years after the fall of the Berlin wall , with its economic penetration and support to many different prowestern mondialist groups establishing by that fundaments for the later American military and political penetration which was unthinkable in 1991 with the Russian military power in Europe still on the more superior level then it is today.The North Atlantic pact couldn't use in Eastern Europe,deep in the mainland of European continent the same patterns which ware used in western Europe . The countries of the traditional German influence ,strictly continental,without any contact with the sea like Hungary,the Czech Republic and Slovakia ware not favorable at all for this kind of spreading.Because of that the total new strategy has been created and its essence represents NATO sponsored program - "Partnership for peace " .with its main aim transformation and accommodation of the Easteuropean countries according to NATO standards In fact is was the whole system of taking steps which essence was the gradual nivelisation ,not only of the military forces but also of the political system and national spirit of the countries of East Europe on the particular level which would be appropriate for the eventual integration with the transatlantic partners . The mighty Easteuropean countries would represent potentially equal ally for Washington and there will be no any opportunity for their subordinance to the American will and its interests . The European economy succeed because of its territorial position ,experience and powerful continental elements of its own economy beside the global trilateral orientation . Because of these reasons German economy in very short time transformed itself to the absolute master of Czech and Hungarian economy . American military and economic power with its maritime essence and its 50-years long experience in the cooperation with western Europe , or in other words with European shores of the Atlantic besides its victory in the cold war wouldn't have any real chanches in the heart of the continent .In fact US chances will be similar to the chances of France in the 20-es and 30-es when it attempted with the creating of so called Little Entante to organize East European countries under one alliance and to stop the German spreading toward east and the restoration of Austro-Hungary .But however in this short-age alliance France was cooperating with equal partners on the east and attempted to realize its interests mainly through the ruling elite and pro-French orientated intelligentsia . But similar develop of the situation in East Europe today is not in complying with the US interests . At the long terms that will mean the preservation of the strength and potential of Eastern and Central Europe for the future continental powers ,maybe for one future Germany emancipated from the Washington influence or some new Russia .Because of that contrary to classical alliance USA choose the option of nivelization and extinction of East Europe through many different programs and joint trainings and maneuvers which reminds more on some childish games then on serious military cooperation.


Today it is very popular opinion that Europe is economic giant and political and military dwarf . Because of that it would be natural task of the European politics to transform Europe to military and political power and to take from Washington dominant political and military role in the continent and in the world . This kind of observation ignores the fact that contemporary Europe ,in fact European Union is the result of uneuropean strategically plans and their realization in the years after the second world war and after the cold war .These two conflicts can be seen as two American campaigns for conquering of Europe.The political solutions which ware implementing after the second world war and after the cold war ware result of US victory in those two anti European campaigns .The transformation of Europe to economic giant was the long standing aim of the American strategists . Their aim is also the creation of the European military forces and the strengthening of the political and diplomatic role of Europe in the international relations.Just let's take a look to the diplomatic role of Europe .The former NATO general secretary Xavier Solana is actual chief of the European diplomacy and represents the personification of the European diplomatic efforts to intrude their own will and their decisions and solutions of the actual world crises . From the crises in former Yugoslavia ,to Israel-Palestinian conflict ,the problem of Iraq and to Northern Korean question there is no one simple point from the momentous decisions to longstanding strategy ,political ideology and philosophy where the interests of the EU are different from those of the USA .There are some nuances ,which are nuances in the process of the realization of the unique will .Also there are opposite attitudes in the degree of globalization and the protection of the national sovereignty,where Europeans are acting with more caution , guided by their own historical experience which is different from obvious American brutality.But looking generally there are the most normal differences between allies .There ware much bigger differences between Roosvelt and Churchill ,Hitler and Mussolini or what we can say in the case of Stalin and Mao Ze Dong ? But all these differences didn't put a question on their alliances and their common aims . The only difference is that in all these examples there are the leaders of sovereign countries,while here we have parts of one single carefully created structure in the period of last few decades. Because of that it is less possibility of any conflict because there are no classical relations between sovereign nations, but relations between parts of the same system .We should notice here that the main conflicts are arising between Washington and particular European nations like France and Germany which still have their own particular national interests ,a kind of relic from multipolar and bipolar past of the international relations. But it is another essence of the relations between Washington and EU in general.While France and Germany represents the model from the past ,NATO and EU represents the model for the future as it is seen with the eyes of mondialist strategists and the creators of "the end of history " and similar ideologies .

Is it possible today to say something similar to the words of the French diplomat Jules Favre who was talking in 1871 about the relations between Germany and Russia and said : " ...We know about the intimacy of the relations between the courts of Berlin and Saint Petersburg. But it is out of doubt that the seed of their conflict is here ..."
Is it possible that there is the base of the future conflict between Brussels and Washington ,beside the whole intimacy between the two mondialist centers ?

Even if this is a case orientation of east European and Balkan countries toward one of these two centers wouldn't get any benefit to the people of East Europe or Balkans .It is enough to look at the modern history of these countries ,just in the past two centuries and to understand that alliance of east European or Balkan countries with any single great power brought to them hostility from other powers ,and internal conflicts ,divisions and traumas . Contemporary which has its political,economic and military but also its spiritual aspect too , with its manifestations like the crises of identity .It is the result of this support from East European and Balkan countries and its small nations to the great powers in their conflicts.

It has to be mentioned here that today there is no one single element of the system of great powers or multipolar world .13 years ago the so called bi polar world was defeated .The stability of east european countries, especially of the Balkan countries and the countries from former Soviet Union depended on the bipolar structure of international relations. Today international relations are characterized by the monopol of power with trilateral global economy .Except this dark scenario which comes to east europe from the west there are the so called islands of freedom like China,Russia and Iran which are charachterizing by their strength like Russia and China or with their authentic antiwestern ideology and political system like it is in the case of Iran and North Korea Any mistake in the sistem,especilly the entry of the "western" values means .perturbation of the stability and the beginning of the return of the country in the "international comunity " in fact in the American realm and under its monopoly of power. Americans are aware of that and it is the essential reason of their support of the Iranian and North Korean reformators while hoping that though their efforts it would be achieve the perturbation of the political system .If they succeed to realize their interests in some different way, they will immediately turn from their support of the reformists and start negotiations with Iran mullahs ,forgetting Teheran students and the struggle for the human rights .The example of Iraq and Afghanistan where former brutal murders and criminals like Chalabi and Hikmatyar ware supported by USA is clear proof about the real American intentions in the world . If it is difficult to be maintained authentic ideological and political system it is even more difficult to establish and create it especially in the contemporary conditions of the hostility geopolitical surroundings. Because of that east European countries should seek their future in the creation and development of the authentic social,political,economic and defense system which will be based on the east European spiritual and state traditions ,not with their involvement in the western system of power where they will get position similar to the positions of the Central American countries or if they are more lucky the position similar to the Turkish position in the west . Contrary to that they should build authentical system which will transformed east European countries to the islands of freedom outside of the western global prison.Not only the examples of Iran and North Korea but also the example of the heroic resistance of the Bosnian Orthodox Serbs to the New World Order, the lasting and successful Byelorussian resistance and the resistance of Slovakia in the mid nineties lead by Vladimir Mechiyar represents favorable fundament and example for the future develop not only of east european countries but of the whole European continent on its real European values

Sasha Papovic (Serbia).

*Greece has predispositions toward thalasocratic bloc only in the Washington perseption because of it's teritory and the simple geographical fact that Greece is Mediteranean country.But in the whole history continental traditions especially the traditions of Sparta and Byzant played more important role not only in Greece but in whole Europe as the real represents of continental values.Greece can't back it's own Spartan and Byzant glory while it has pro- western thalasocratic orientation whihc is more in the interest of Washington then in the interest of Greek nation.Because of that Greece needs a kind of historical transformation of it's own geopolitics wich will orientated the state to more continental nature of it's relations and transforming it from "the represent of the west on the balkans" to the "island of freedom,out of the global American prison,created on Byzantinian spiritual and statehood traditions " .This kind of country,new Greece in fact new Byzant will represent example for all other nations from Adriatic to Pacific and also that can be one of the greatest defeats for western thalasocratic geopolitics.