More than 50 writers and translators published on 18nd March following opinion text. This text has been translated to German, Spanish, English and Czech in order to call writers in other NATO countries to start the debate. This action is part of the international campaign NATO GAME OVER of Peace Action.
On 22nd March during the international action day NATO GAME OVER writers organised aside of the action of civil disobedience a literary walk around NATO HQ in Brussels.
In 2009 NATO will be 60 years old. The writers are determined to use this anniversary with a European literary initiative to raise the debate on NATO.
Authors and translators are invited to adhere to this call.
Writers says NATO GAME OVER
Stories have forever been the memory of mankind. Because of the Iliad and the Odyssey we never forgot one of the oldest wars of our civilization. Notwithstanding the fact that this war is part of European history, it was mainly fought outside of our continent. That too we never forgot.
Today’s situation isn’t any different: Europe still wages wars, mainly outside of Europe. With the ruse of the Trojan horse the Greeks managed to conquer Troy. Our Trojan horse is called Weapons of Mass Destruction and the War against Terror. Under these pretexts war has been waged for over five years in Afghanistan and Iraq, Iran is on the radar for possible intervention their and Pakistan’s fate is uncertain. The abduction of Helena from Sparta marked the beginning of a war of insanity. The fall of the Twin Towers in New York became the signifier for the United States to intervene worldwide with military force. Europe risks being swept along in this endeavour by her mighty ally. This madness has to end.
Does NATO contribute to Peace?
In many European countries a large p art of the population doesn’t agree with the world leaders who chose to settle conflicts by war and military posturing. In Poland they don’t want an American missile shield, nor do they want new bases in Italy, nor in Belgium do the people want American nuclear weapons. Yet time and time again the will of the population has been forced to yield to the higher interests of NATO. In spite of this we cannot stand idly by and let it happen.
We ask ourselves whether NATO really is the right instrument to prevent the outbreak of war, a new arms race and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Does NATO really contribute to peace?
In 1949, in the wake of the Second World War, 10 Western European countries together with Canada and the United States formed a military alliance. They agreed to defend their territory together, if need be with nuclear weapons. Today NATO has been enlarged to the territory of the former Soviet Union. NATO looks with covetous eyes towards the Ukraine and Georgia in an attempt to fully cut off the old enemy, Russia. NATO has drastically expanded its remit. It no longer restricts itself to the defence of its own territory. NATO conducts military interventions all over the world. These interventions are even considered by NATO to be one of its core tasks.
With Weapons of Mass Destruction
On NATO members’ territory there has hardly been outright war. That is true. Yet Europe has played a pivotal role in wars in other parts of the world, as recent figures prove. American military personnel are stationed in European bases. 54 000 of them were deployed in Iraq. In 2006, two thirds of all the American military personnel stationed in Europe were involved in missions in Afghanistan or Iraq. The American Army was deployed from Germany and Italy. The fighter planes took off from British bases and from aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean. Without Europe the invasion of Iraq would have been impossible. The same is true of the ensuing occupation. Iraq was attacked because the country was believed to have been in possession of weapons of mass destruction. Iran is under threat because it might potentially produce them. In the meantime, NATO has a stockpile of 350 atomic weapons primed in Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Turkey. According to international humanitarian rights these weapons are as illegal and prohibited as they would be anywhere else in the world. Why aren’t these weapons decommissioned? This is a direct consequence of NATO membership. If a country is member of NATO it is under an obligation to cooperate in operations outside of its own territory, by sending troops or providing infrastructure, or logistical support. What the population feels about this is immaterial. NATO’s military strategy takes precedence.
This unhealthy situation might become even more serious as a result.
The Balance Tipped
In April 2008 an important NATO meeting is scheduled to be held in Bucharest. The agenda foresees the elaboration of a new strategic concept. In a discussion paper, NATO sketches out the thrust of its new military strategy for the next decade, in which nuclear weapons also play a role. The US wants NATO to evolve into a worldwide military alliance of like-minded states, whilst a democratic, efficient UN could be a much better instrument to promote world peace. Do NATO policies or those of its members create new enemies or new threats? Of course that question isn’t even broached. If the new concept is accepted, the chances of disarmament and détente in the world will all but evaporate completely.
NATO was formed almost 60 years ago to protect the allies’ territory. For many years during the Cold War, NATO and the Warsaw Pact maintained a precarious balance. With the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the disappearance of the Iron Curtain a new situation emerged. The original enemy of NATO no longer exists and NATO together with the USA is free to go looking for a new enemy wherever it sees fit. No other alliance keeps NATO in check. No other pact curbs its expansionist drive.
Political courage and debate needed
At this juncture where NATO is on the verge of reformulating its content and redefining is raison d’ être, we would like to advise our political leaders to put an end to the illegal nuclear policy pursued by the Alliance and to carry out a thorough evaluation of NATO’s means, goals, democratic accountability and mandate. To do so requires political courage. Does our present generation of politicians lack this courage? If the answer is yes then we have to give them that courage. We have to raise our voices.
On March 22nd 2008 in and around NATO Headquarters in Brussels the protest NATO GAME OVER will be held. It will be a civil disobedience action. Groups of free citizens will attempt to penetrate the NATO grounds and will seal [obstruct/block off] gates, windows and doors. They will resort to such measures because all the conventional democratic avenues of ending NATO’s nuclear policy have been exhausted.
We want to draw attention to the importance of this kind of non-violent initiative. Once upon a time sovereign states founded NATO in name of their populations. If concerned citizens want to gain powers of scrutiny over NATO’s wheeling and dealing, this protest clearly signals their commitment. The Belgian authorities should not respond to this commitment by a show of force and police brutality.
Let us not sacrifice democracy and freedom as Iphigenia did in order to win senseless wars.
A military alliance, intervening worldwide, possessing nuclear weapons and willing to use a first strike, constitutes a risk to world peace. Let us therefore launch the debate whether the NATO is a necessary presence in our world.
Jef Blancke, Gie Bogaert, Achilles Cools, Geertrui Daem, Norbert De Beule, Kurt De Boodt, Johan De Boose, Frank Decerf, Marleen de Crée, Frank De Crits, Mieke De Loof, Frans Denissen, Didi De Paris, Noëlla Elpers, Don Fabulist, Hank Geerts, Wim Geysen, Luuk Gruwez, Stefan Hertmans, Peter Holvoet-Hanssen, Henri-Floris Jespers, Hilde Keteleer, Patrick Lateur, Kris Lauwerys, Ann Meskens, Joseph Pearce, Elvis Peeters, Frank Pollet, Guy Posson, Anne Provoost, Willem M. Roggeman, Pjeroo Roobjee, Annmarie Sauer, Karel Sergen, Hedwig Speliers, Koen Stassijns, Peter Theunynck, Stefaan van den Bremt, Walter van den Broeck, Ingrid Vander Veken, Miriam Van hee, Kamiel Vanhole, Kirstin Vanlierde, Bart Van Loo, Dirk Vekemans, Paul Verrept, Erik Vlaminck, Lief Vleugels, Bart Vonck
