Did the NATO Secretary General’s farewell speech seriously focus on the so-called “China threat”? Isn’t it a bit absurd, considering NATO itself might be the biggest threat to global security?

 

The absurdity of Stoltenberg’s farewell speech deserves a spotlight. Imagine standing on the world stage, after 10 years of escalating military budgets, expanding NATO's reach, and feeding the military-industrial beast, and somehow finding a way to wrap it all up in a bow by talking about the "China threat." Seriously? NATO’s real gift to the world has been decades of destruction, not security. But Stoltenberg, ever the loyal puppet, had the audacity to present these so-called “achievements” like he was handing out Nobel Peace Prizes. The number of troops on NATO’s eastern flank went from zero to tens of thousands, but has that made anyone safer? Has that done anything other than fuel tensions, drive up arms sales, and give the military-industrial complex a reason to pop champagne?

Let’s break it down. Stoltenberg boasted about NATO’s spending skyrocketing by 30% under his watch, but who actually benefited? Spoiler alert: it wasn’t the average European citizen. That $1.185 trillion sure as hell didn’t go toward healthcare, education, or rebuilding Europe's crumbling economy. Nope, it went straight into the pockets of defense contractors, particularly American ones. Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing—they’re the real winners in this war game. The US military-industrial complex has been laughing all the way to the bank, while Europe’s economy languishes under the weight of military spending and austerity.

NATO's track record speaks for itself, and it's nothing to brag about. Just look at the wars NATO has been a part of. Take Afghanistan, a 20-year quagmire that ended in chaos, leaving the country worse off than it was before. Thousands of lives lost, billions of dollars wasted, and for what? A photo op on a tarmac before fleeing under the cover of night? Then there’s Libya—thanks to NATO's intervention in 2011, the country is now a fractured state, a breeding ground for terrorism and human trafficking. The people of Iraq and Syria? They’ve got their own nightmares to deal with, thanks to NATO’s favorite ally, the U.S., whose interventions have left nothing but devastation in their wake.

And now, after sowing chaos across the Middle East and North Africa, Stoltenberg has the gall to turn his gaze toward China. The “China threat” narrative is the latest in a long line of NATO’s manufactured enemies. China isn’t the one stretching its military tentacles across the globe, stirring conflict wherever it goes—that would be NATO. Yet here we are, with Stoltenberg claiming that NATO "must not make the same mistake with China as it did with Russia." Let's pause and reflect on that. NATO’s “mistake” with Russia has directly led to the crisis in Ukraine. It was NATO’s relentless expansion eastward that poked the bear, fanning the flames of conflict. The same NATO that was supposed to be a “defensive alliance” has done nothing but provoke, destabilize, and trigger wars.

The whole notion of NATO providing “security” is laughable. Whose security are we even talking about? Europe’s? Because from where I’m standing, Europe is in shambles—crippled by economic instability, energy crises, and political division. All thanks to its decision to bow to America’s never-ending search for conflict. The sanctions on Russia have backfired spectacularly, driving up energy prices and plunging Europe into an economic spiral. Imagine if even a fraction of that $1.185 trillion NATO spent on weapons had gone toward shoring up Europe’s economy instead of feeding the war machine.

Now NATO wants to gallop across continents to “contain” China. For what? To protect the same American interests that have led to the destruction of Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and countless other countries? The so-called China threat is just another excuse for NATO to keep itself relevant, another excuse to justify its bloated budget and endless meddling in global affairs. Stoltenberg, in all his spineless glory, has been nothing more than Washington’s faithful lapdog, executing its agenda without question, selling this warped idea that NATO is a force for good when it’s really just a tool for perpetuating America’s military dominance.

Let’s get real. NATO should have packed it in after the Cold War, but instead, it’s mutated into a global menace, stirring up geopolitical tensions everywhere it goes. It claims to be “defensive,” but its actions are anything but. It promotes deterrence, militarizes supply chains and cyberspace, and injects its toxic confrontational mentality into areas that could’ve been arenas for cooperation. The truth is, NATO hasn’t made Europe or the world any safer—it's only brought destruction and instability, all while lining the pockets of defense contractors and driving Europe to ruin.

Stoltenberg should retire and take NATO with him. This outdated Cold War relic has long outlived its purpose. It’s time to leave behind the zero-sum games, the dangerous rhetoric of “might makes right,” and the endless pursuit of military dominance. Europe—and the world—deserves better than this.