The National Defense Authorization Scam
Nearing the 1 trillion-dollar mark, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2024 is a bloated, wasteful bill that will bring the US empire closer to its demise, not to a glorious battle with the new ‘axis of evil’.
Included in the new NDAA, just approved by Congress and awaiting Joe Biden’s signature, is a provision that will prevent a president from unilaterally withdrawing the US from NATO. This is an obvious move to stop Donald Trump from ditching NATO. Anne Applebaum wrote an article for The Atlantic in which she argues that the NATO alliance is under threat from a second Trump term. Applebaum, after citing the various figures who are speculated to have talked Trump out of withdrawing from NATO, warmongers like James Mattis and John Bolton, writes that “In a second term, Trump would be surrounded by people who either share his dislike of American security alliances or don’t know anything about them and don’t care.”[i] If she took the time to understand the arguments against NATO and its expansion, she would see that there are thinkers who have argued since the end of the Cold War that NATO should be disbanded, like Noam Chomsky and Chris Hedges. Their arguments are not simply borne out of dislike for American alliances or a lack of knowledge about them. This moronic reductionism echoes the calls for impeachment and evoking the 25th Amendment that were made when Trump floated US withdrawal from NATO during his presidency.
The move by Senators Tim Kaine and Marco Rubio to ‘protect’ NATO from Trump are absurd and hysterical. If these people read the NATO treaty, they would realize that Trump cannot unilaterally withdraw anyways. Article 13 of the treaty posits that “After the Treaty has been in force for twenty years, any Party may cease to be a Party one year after its notice of denunciation has been given to the Government of the United States of America, which will inform the Governments of the other Parties of the deposit of each notice of denunciation.”[ii] Trump would give his notice of denunciation, and then a year afterwards, the US would cease to be a member of NATO. This article would need to be revised however, as if the US is no longer part of the alliance, then it would not need to be given any notices of denunciation by other member states.
NATO is reliant on the US and if it were to leave, then it would quickly unravel. Analysts like Applebaum say that NATO would be abandoned by Trump like it’s a negative. Debates over NATO are considered taboo in Washington and the provision in the NDAA that is meant to “handcuff Trump” proves this. That it is meant to prevent Trump from fulfilling one of his stated goals is only part of the issue. The more disturbing implication is that the US ruling class has established that NATO is an obligation of the US that is beyond debate.
The illiberal liberal class is cheering the NDAA provision. Alexander Panetta writes for CBC News “Trump-proof NATO? The United States Congress is on it. American lawmakers have moved to prevent any U.S. president from unilaterally withdrawing from the international alliance.”, and he cites Trump’s 2024 election platform which posits that he will reevaluate NATO’s mission and purpose.[iii] Panetta says of this plan to reassess NATO that “It’s laid out in language not normally used by a U.S. president.”[iv] This affirms the notion that to question NATO as a US president is not just wrong, but insane and treacherous.
The NATO withdrawal provision is outlined in Section 1250A. of the NDAA, which states that “The President shall not suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty, done at Washington, DC, April 4, 1949, except by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided that two-thirds of the Senators present concur, or pursuant to an Act of Congress.”[v] There would not even be an actual debate in the Senate over NATO withdrawal. The decision to remain would be unanimous, and US allies would pressure the Senate to vote against NATO withdrawal as well. Trump and his administration would be seen as a menace to the liberal world order, of which NATO is a sacred component. The ‘advice’ of the Senate would be the advice of the transnational security elite, not the American people who would be sent over to Estonia or Montenegro if they’re invaded. Tucker Carlson pointed this out in a monologue in 2019, and he said that he worried that Trump might be assassinated over his tirades against NATO.[vi]
If NATO is so righteous and necessary, then its staunchest advocates shouldn’t resort to smearing anyone who questions NATO and its purpose as Kremlin agents or unpatriotic. NATO is, as Hedges argues, “the most aggressive and dangerous military alliance on the planet.”, and Russia is just “the appetizer”.[vii] Ultimately, NATO will try to take on China. This is why NATO’s mission and purpose needs to at least be reassessed, as Trump’s 2024 campaign is promising it will, and since the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, along with the Warsaw Pact, it devolved into endless mission creep. From its involvement in post-Soviet Europe to the war on terror following 9/11, to interventions like Libya, and presently, its declared mission of ensuring that China and Russia do not create a rival world order. NATO is not protecting liberal democracy; it is eating away at it.
Although public opinion on NATO is mostly positive in the US and elsewhere, there is enough unfavorable opinion that it should be up for debate. Even if one person or 1% of the population were against it, there should be a debate. Polling done by Pew Research on the opinion of NATO in each member state showed that in the US, 35% of the population has unfavorable views.[viii] Surely this is enough to warrant a national debate over NATO membership in America. According to the foreign policy experts, NATO is a grand, just, and necessary alliance- that’s final.
Another troublesome item in the NDAA is the delivery of weapons and training for Taiwan. The provisions on Taiwan in the NDAA are beleaguered by contradictions, as they claim to abide by One China Policy, but they also abide by the Taiwan Relations Act, which is itself a violation of the One China Policy.[ix] All this spending on deterring (antagonizing) China, funding Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, would be better spent on the American people.
Voters in hollowed out towns and counties see this obscene spending on foreign countries and are enraged. Public opinion on NATO or Taiwan may not reflect that as well as opinion on funding for Ukraine, but if voters were allowed to see an actual debate on NATO spending and US commitments, then perhaps they would change their minds and be as skeptical of the alliance as Trump.
NATO is not even up for debate, neither is Taiwan or Israel. How many people know about One China policy? The rise of Trump showed that there is an appetite for a more restrained US foreign policy. Although this is dismissed as ‘isolationism’ by illiberal liberal globalist thinkers who champion bankrupt ideologies like conservative or liberal internationalism, there are myriad voices across the political spectrum who advocate for a reduced defense budget, from realists like Barry Posner and Stephen Walt to left-wing thinkers like Hedges and Medea Benjamin.
The addition of the provision that removes NATO from being left unilaterally by a US president, which ultimately makes NATO beyond debate or question, in the NDAA for 2024 is anti-democratic and must be called out for what it is, a blatant disregard for the American people who may not want their tax dollars or soldiers sent to Latvia if it is under attack. The NDAA is a defense scam, not a defense bill.
Zelensky Needs his Weekly Allowance
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky visited Washington this week, and there was also a debate over EU accession for Ukraine which was held up by Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban, who also vetoed an EU aid package for Ukraine.
The reporting on Orban’s stance on Ukraine funding and EU accession is hysterical. The BBC’s Nick Thorpe’s headline reads “What has Hungary’s Orban got against Ukraine?”[x] So, because Orban is deviating from the rest of the EU on Ukraine, he must have a problem with Ukraine and Zelensky. It cannot be because Orban was elected to serve the Hungarian people, not the Ukrainians, or for other reasons, like Orban’s desire to work with Russia as well as his allies in Europe. Thorpe hilariously writes that “Mr Orban seems rather more at ease with Vladimir Putin than with Mr Zelensky, and is the Russian leader’s closest ally in Europe.”[xi] Perhaps Orban finds Zelensky obnoxious and demanding? The illiberal liberal class cannot bring themselves to consider the possibility that Orban’s position on Ukraine may be justified, and that he may be putting the interests of his citizens first, not the interests of the ‘liberal world order’. For them, a move against Ukraine is a move against democracy and the West and is also a move into the arms of Putin.
Katalin Cseh argues in her article in The Guardian that the EU has failed to hold Orban accountable for his alleged dismantling of the rule of law in Hungary. The EU had withheld funds for Hungary as punishment and in return for allowing EU accession for Ukraine, the funds were unblocked. Cseh writes of Orban that “He has a far-right authoritarian vision for Europe, and he seeks to reshape the EU along these lines. With the far right on the rise across Europe, Orbán eyes a 2024 victory for his allies in the European parliament elections, bolstered by recent election results in the Netherlands.”[xii] The election results in the Netherlands, where the ‘Dutch Donald Trump’ Geert Wilder won on an ‘anti-Islam’ platform, as well as a promise to cut Dutch funding to Ukraine, are reflective of growing dissatisfaction with fueling a now endless war between Ukraine and Russia and a flood of migrants from the Middle East. Cseh goes on to write that “Orbán’s attempt to thwart Ukraine is also part of a domestic political calculation: it’s about stoking hate against foreigners and minorities to fire up his base before elections. It’s not six-dimensional chess; it’s an age-old, sinister playbook that always needs a new enemy – immigrants, the LGBTQ community, or now, Ukrainians.”[xiii] For commentators like Cseh, the only possibility for why a leader would not want to send more money to Ukraine is that they are a far right, Putin loving maniac. Orban’s position on Ukraine does not necessarily mean that he hates Ukrainians. This assumption proves that Cseh and other illiberal liberal thinkers embody the very thing they claim to hate. They are as Manichean as their opposition. To go against Zelensky’s bratty demands is apparently to be in league with Putin.
At the inauguration of Argentina’s new president, Javier Milei, Zelensky confronted Orban about his decision to block Ukraine’s accession to the EU, and he told him to give him one reason why Ukraine should not be in the EU.[xiv] Orban has argued that Ukraine should be a ‘buffer zone’ between it and Russia, a similar position to Putin.[xv] Orban may be frustrated with funding to Ukraine being imposed as an obligation by the EU. Zelensky’s childish behavior is being incentivized by the illiberal liberal class. Until a reasonable debate over continuing to fund Ukraine is held, then backlash to it will manifest in the form of demagogues like Wilder and Orban. Zelensky must be called out on his petulance.
During his visit to the White House, Zelensky behaved like a spoiled child at Christmas. He met with Biden and Republican lawmakers to list off the various weapons systems that he ‘needed’ to stave off the dastardly Russians, like long range missiles. As Politico notes, Biden himself criticized the Republicans holding up legislation that includes millions more for Ukraine and he cited Russian media thanking Republicans for holding up legislation, and he said, “If you’re being celebrated by Russian propagandists, it might be time to rethink what you’re doing,”[xvi] The McCarthyite smears continue. So, Republicans should vote to send more money to Ukraine simply because Russia would not like it, and their celebrations would cease? The decisions of US lawmakers should be based on how foreign powers will perceive them, not the American people? Politico also quotes Max Bergmann from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, who said, “To just put it bluntly, a lot of Ukrainians are going to die if this money isn’t passed,”[xvii] Apparently, it’s the responsibility of the US to ensure the survival of the citizens in other countries. Analysts like Bergmann care more about the welfare of Ukrainians than Americans. According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 111, 355 people died from overdoses in the US in 2023, a 2.3% increase from 2022, and in 2022, 49,449 people committed suicide in the US, a 2.6% increase from 2021.[xviii] This does not incite outrage or upset in the illiberal liberal class. Rather than address these issues, the cretins in the national security elite are more concerned with other nations.
Republican holdouts are refusing to vote to pass legislation until their request for additional funding for border security is accepted. According to Biden, if they do not, it will give “Putin the greatest Christmas gift they could possibly give him.”[xix] How much more money and weapons will it take before Zelensky has what he needs? It is unclear. The billions he has already received and pocketed is apparently not enough. At this point, Zelensky is on a weekly allowance, receiving millions from the EU and most of the West.
Early in his visit to the US, Zelensky delivered a speech at the National Defense University. He sounded like a Western national security elite, making references to the fight for democracy and against the evil of Putin. Of Putin, Zelensky said that:
“He’s fighting Ukraine, but really, he’s up against all of free, united Europe. He’s wrecking everyday life in Ukrainian cities, but his real target is the freedom people enjoy from Warsaw to Chicago to Yokohama. He’s trying to make democratic countries lose hope, pushing the idea that dictatorships with a bit of market economy are winning this global face-off. This isn’t just about competing systems – Russia’s still got the means to mess with democracies worldwide. Putin’s got buddies in this – each one a threat to any free nation, to regional or global order, to human rights and democracy, be it HAMAS, Iran, North Korea or others. No accidents here – they’re all linked by their hate for freedom. Putin’s crafting his own ideology, and at its core is complete disregard for human life, for freedom, and for respecting any kind of borders – between countries, between people, even between truth and lies.”[xx]
Zelensky acting like he represents liberal democracies around the world is absurd, as is the notion that because countries like North Korea and Iran are autocracies they are ‘buddies’ with Putin. Everything Zelensky says about Putin’s ideology can be said about him and the US, his disregard for human life, freedom and lack of respect for borders.
Zelensky did not visit the US on behalf of Ukrainian citizens, he visited on behalf of himself and his circle of oligarchs. The picture he took with the executives of US arms manufacturers perfectly captured this. Zelensky is not a hero, a modern-day Winston Churchill, he is a spoiled brat, exploiting the West’s fear of Russia to line his pockets and boost his ego.
[i] Applebaum, Anne. “Trump Will Abandon NATO.” The Atlantic, December 4, 2023. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/01/trump-2024-reelection-pull-out-of-nato-membership/676120/.
[ii] NATO. “The North Atlantic Treaty.” NATO, April 4, 1949. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm.
[iii] Panetta, Alexander. “Protect NATO from Donald Trump? The U.S. Congress Just Passed That into Law.” CBC, December 15, 2023. https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/congress-trump-proofs-nato-1.7059768.
[iv] Panetta. “Protect NATO from Donald Trump? The U.S. Congress Just Passed That into Law.”
[v] Senate Armed Services Committee, and Jack Reed. “S.2226 – National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024.” Congress.gov. Washington, D.C: United States Congress, 2023. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2226/text?r=367.
[vi] FOX News, and Tucker Carlson. “Tucker: You’re Not Allowed to Question NATO.” http://www.youtube.com, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UScRHLH0mu0&t=362s.
[vii] Hedges, Chris. “Hedges: NATO — the Most Dangerous Military Alliance on the Planet.” ScheerPost, July 11, 2022. https://scheerpost.com/2022/07/11/hedges-nato-the-most-dangerous-military-alliance-on-the-planet/.
[viii] Chavda, Janakee. “5. Views of NATO.” Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, July 10, 2023. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2023/07/10/views-of-nato/.
[ix] Senate Armed Services Committee and Reed. “S.2226 – National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024.”
[x] Thorpe, Nick. “What Has Hungary’s Orban Got against Ukraine?” Www.bbc.com, December 15, 2023. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67725570.
[xi] Thorpe. “What Has Hungary’s Orban Got against Ukraine?”
[xii] Cseh, Katalin. “Like Putin, Viktor Orbán Is Learning He Can Act with Impunity: The Cash Keeps Flowing.” The Guardian, December 17, 2023, sec. Opinion. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/17/viktor-orban-hungary-eu-ukraine-vladimir-putin.
[xiii] Cseh. “Like Putin, Viktor Orbán Is Learning He Can Act with Impunity: The Cash Keeps Flowing.” The
[xiv] Thorpe. “What Has Hungary’s Orban Got against Ukraine?”
[xv] Thorpe. “What Has Hungary’s Orban Got against Ukraine?”
[xvi] Ward, Alexander, and Adam Cancryn. “Biden ‘Not Making Promises’ US Will Further Assist Ukraine.” POLITICO, December 12, 2023. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/12/biden-not-making-promises-us-will-further-assist-ukraine-00131433.
[xvii] Ward and Cancryn. “Biden ‘Not Making Promises’ US Will Further Assist Ukraine.”
[xviii] CDC. “Products – Vital Statistics Rapid Release – Provisional Drug Overdose Data.” CDC, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdose-data.htm and “Suicide Data and Statistics.” http://www.cdc.gov. CDC, August 10, 2023. https://www.cdc.gov/suicide/suicide-data-statistics.html.
[xix] Williams, Michael. “What to Know about Ukrainian President Zelensky’s Crucial Day in Washington | CNN Politics.” CNN, December 12, 2023. https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/12/politics/takeaways-volodymyr-zelensky-washington/index.html.
[xx] Zelensky, Volodymyr. “Freedom Must Always Prevail When Challenged – Speech by the President of Ukraine at the National Defense University of the United States — Official Website of the President of Ukraine.” Official website of the President of Ukraine, 2023. https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/svoboda-povinna-peremagati-zavzhdi-koli-htos-kidaye-yij-vikl-87673.
References
Applebaum, Anne. “Trump Will Abandon NATO.” The Atlantic, December 4, 2023. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/01/trump-2024-reelection-pull-out-of-nato-membership/676120/.
CDC. “Products – Vital Statistics Rapid Release – Provisional Drug Overdose Data.” CDC, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdose-data.htm.
———. “Suicide Data and Statistics.” http://www.cdc.gov. CDC, August 10, 2023. https://www.cdc.gov/suicide/suicide-data-statistics.html.
Chavda, Janakee. “5. Views of NATO.” Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, July 10, 2023. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2023/07/10/views-of-nato/.
Cseh, Katalin. “Like Putin, Viktor Orbán Is Learning He Can Act with Impunity: The Cash Keeps Flowing.” The Guardian, December 17, 2023, sec. Opinion. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/17/viktor-orban-hungary-eu-ukraine-vladimir-putin.
FOX News, and Tucker Carlson. “Tucker: You’re Not Allowed to Question NATO.” http://www.youtube.com, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UScRHLH0mu0&t=362s.
Hedges, Chris. “Hedges: NATO — the Most Dangerous Military Alliance on the Planet.” ScheerPost, July 11, 2022. https://scheerpost.com/2022/07/11/hedges-nato-the-most-dangerous-military-alliance-on-the-planet/.
NATO. “The North Atlantic Treaty.” NATO, April 4, 1949. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm.
Panetta, Alexander. “Protect NATO from Donald Trump? The U.S. Congress Just Passed That into Law.” CBC, December 15, 2023. https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/congress-trump-proofs-nato-1.7059768.
Senate Armed Services Committee, and Jack Reed. “S.2226 – National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024.” Congress.gov. Washington, D.C: United States Congress, 2023. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2226/text?r=367.
Thorpe, Nick. “What Has Hungary’s Orban Got against Ukraine?” Www.bbc.com, December 15, 2023. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67725570.
Ward, Alexander, and Adam Cancryn. “Biden ‘Not Making Promises’ US Will Further Assist Ukraine.” POLITICO, December 12, 2023. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/12/biden-not-making-promises-us-will-further-assist-ukraine-00131433.
Williams, Michael. “What to Know about Ukrainian President Zelensky’s Crucial Day in Washington | CNN Politics.” CNN, December 12, 2023. https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/12/politics/takeaways-volodymyr-zelensky-washington/index.html.
Zelensky, Volodymyr. “Freedom Must Always Prevail When Challenged – Speech by the President of Ukraine at the National Defense University of the United States — Official Website of the President of Ukraine.” Official website of the President of Ukraine, 2023. https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/svoboda-povinna-peremagati-zavzhdi-koli-htos-kidaye-yij-vikl-87673.
Not Without Incident: Questioning Big Brother's Platitudes 
Leave a comment