Possibly the USA acts in the atmosphere that NATO is an organization of its own, in a way pretend that they are the only official in NATO and make statements. As such, it looks like an organization that uses NATO to protect US interests around the world. Of course, this image bothers some of the NATO member countries. Because when NATO's founding purpose is remembered, it is not possible for the negative image not to disturb.
In the meantime, it should be discussed whether NATO should continue to exist due to changing world conditions and balances, but it still does not make sense for the USA to protect the whole world from Soviet expansionism. Because when the names who serve as the secretary general inevitably make a statement about NATO, they are careful to keep the pulse of the USA and not to overlook its approach. Like giving the money the whistle, they fall into the position of employees who have to take into account the approach of their boss.
I draw attention to the fact that NATO's existence should be questioned in this column from time to time. I am of the opinion that what an organization formed in bipolar world conditions does in today's unipolar world should be considered. Because with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact, which was an anti-NATO organization, dissolved. The world has turned towards a new structuring. However, this organization still continues, as if NATO was created to protect democratic countries against Soviet expansion. As such, NATO has now become an organization that the US uses to protect its interests.
As a result, NATO is not using it to protect democracies against Soviet expansionism, but to send troops to some countries under the umbrella of NATO with the claim of cleansing the world of terrorists and destroying terrorist organizations. It is not contented with this, and NATO member countries are trying to be brought into line by means of NATO. In his speech in the European Parliament to explain this opinion, NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg repeated the claims made by the USA, stating that there are serious disagreements between Turkey and NATO on issues such as S-400 and democratic rights. There is no need to ask where the NATO Secretary General got the right to judge our country like this. Obviously, the US uses NATO as a stick when needed. It is then questionable whether such a military alliance needs to continue. As long as this questioning is not done, will countries like Turkey not give soldiers to NATO as long as necessary, and consequently serve the colonial powers?
We were accustomed to the imposition of some sanctions by the USA and the criticism of our country at every opportunity because Turkey bought S-400 defense systems from Russia, but the NATO Secretary General's criticism of our country in the USA, democratic rights or the S-400s. I think it would be enough to see that NATO's raison d'être has disappeared. The fact that a NATO Secretary General, who was careful not to directly criticize our country until yesterday, has now suddenly started to use the US language shows that the organization in question is completely under the control and direction of the USA. This shows that such an international military organization has lost its neutrality.