The leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have called on Iran to suspend its missile defense program, which has been plagued by scandals and a history of covert operations, sabotage, assassination and genocide. .. has been off the roof for a long time.
The leaders of the NATO member states, whose occupations and crimes or the effects of their crimes and occupations on Afghanistan and Iraq are quite obvious, issued a statement in 79 paragraphs at the end of the meeting on Monday, one of which was related to Iran. We condemn Iran’s support for proxy forces and non-governmental armed actors, including through the financing, training and dissemination of missile technology and weapons,” they wrote in the paragraph, stressing that they would not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.
They have also called on Iran to suspend its ballistic missile program, which it says is inconsistent with UN Security Council Resolution 2231. The text only condemns the annexation of the Crimean peninsula to Russia, terrorism and any use of chemical weapons in Syria. Thus, it is not surprising that this statement provoked protests from the Iranian authorities.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh tweeted in response to the statement: Given its devastating history in our region, NATO is not in a position to preach to Iran, which is an anchor of stability, security and peace in the region. He stated that equating the injured party with the saboteur party is only a sign of a flawed and political approach: Adhere to international law instead of preaching to others.
Khatbzadeh certainly did not mean to say that NATO never had or was supposed to have a moral and humanitarian mission. But he was probably referring to remarks made by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and former US President Bill Clinton during NATO intervention in Yugoslavia, which were described as a moral mission. Ten years ago, then-President Barack Obama and former British Prime Minister David Cameron made the same argument, paving the way for NATO military intervention in Libya.
Until the end of the Cold War, NATO had never participated in any open warfare, and most of its operations were limited to covert operations in member and hostile countries. Some cases of covert NATO operations in the member states, such as sabotage and assassination, were later revealed and investigated.
NATO then intervened in Libya, as a result of which the country was plunged into constant chaos and even still does not have a single established government. NATO’s so-called humanitarian intervention in Libya was the result of Western opportunism for regime change, which resulted in nothing but endless inter-tribal warfare, humanitarian catastrophe, refugee crisis, the spread of weapons throughout the region and the rise of ISIS in North Africa.
Here, too, the idea of ​​humanitarian intervention came to help justify this intervention. However, NATO’s 20-year presence has not only failed, but after ten years of war and exorbitant costs and material and humanitarian costs, it now intends to leave the country under a US agreement with the Taliban.
As America’s handmade coalition and the arm of its power in Europe, NATO was able to create the illusion during the Cold War that its main mission was to protect European security.
After the end of the Cold War, NATO was given the mission to justify US military intervention in the world. To justify military intervention under the pretext of possessing weapons of mass destruction, NATO rushed to the aid of a country that is the only country to use weapons of mass destruction in human history.
