NATO's eastward expansion, right or wrong?
NATO has expanded eastward five times in its history, including Central and Eastern European countries and the former Soviet republics, which have joined NATO. From the standpoint of Russia and Belarus, this kind of behavior of joining the "enemy" camp is undoubtedly a "betrayal", and at the same time, the trend of joining and strengthening the enemy camp is a potential threat to their own homeland security.
However, from the standpoint of small countries such as the Czech Republic, Poland, Bulgaria, etc., the lack of sufficient depth of territorial defense is a natural security defect, and it is only possible to build its own national defense and security barrier by relying on a certain large country or body defense organization. In the past, when the United States and the Soviet Union were vying for hegemony, they could choose between NATO and the Soviet Union, and they could even ride the wall, just as some European and Asian countries now ride the wall between China and the United States, adopting a balancing strategy. However, since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, this small country has only one way to choose, that is, to attach itself to the victorious United States, join NATO as soon as possible, and use NATO's common defense mechanism to quickly stabilize the domestic situation and the geopolitical pattern with neighboring countries, and prevent internal turmoil and external attacks. At that time, the whole world was taking the United States and the West as the spiritual highland, and whoever could get closer to the United States and the West would be close to a prosperous life, and joining NATO became the fastest way.
Therefore, whether from the perspective of national defense and security after the Cold War or from the perspective of economic development, the leaders of Central and Eastern European countries and former Soviet Union countries that are eager to join NATO should see what mistakes they make in their strategic choices. After all, surviving in the slits is the fate of most small countries.
However, there is a limit to everything, and once a certain limit is exceeded, a qualitative change will occur. The same is true for small countries in terms of their own security. If NATO regards its fifth eastward expansion as the final expansion and exercises restraint in its own behavior, it will be the best way to maintain its own healthy development. However, the tidal force generated by Mu Qiang's psychology drove the non-joiners to continue to pour into the arms of NATO; The huge economic benefits brought by its own deterrence hegemony have also made NATO more greedy.
If a huge Warsaw Pact organization can collapse and a huge Soviet Union collapse, then what is impossible to continue to dismember Russia, and even China?
There is no right or wrong in the game of great powers. However, depriving the people of other countries of their basic livelihood in order to live a richer life, and encircling and suppressing the territories of other countries in order to plunder the wealth of more countries, is a real act of colonialism, and imperialism and colonial aggression are exactly what the people of the whole world should oppose and unite to overthrow. Because, it is unjust, it is wrong.
Okay, about my analysis of NATO's eastward expansion, right or wrong, if you have anything to refute or add, please feel free to discuss and share with you in the comment area, if you also like my article**, remember**, follow or give me a "highly recommended" support. If you want to show your support to the blogger by tipping, you can find the appreciation button to encourage the article.