There is no worse blind man than the one who does not want to see, nor worse deaf than the one who does not want to hear (a Spanish proverb, no doubt based on John 12:40 and Isaiah 6:9)

There is no worse deaf person than the one who does not want to hear (Baltasar Gracián: El Criticón, 1657, Volume III, page 209)

Belgrade (Serbia) bombed by NATO in 1999 WITHOUT a UN mandate

Recent events push me to reflect on NATO, that North Atlantic Treaty organization that has come to intervene militarily even in the Far East. In Afghanistan, specifically, and with apparently poor and shameful results.

Although on the 16th of this month Leo XIV publicly and verbatim declared that “NATO has not started any war, the Poles are concerned because they feel that their airspace has been invaded, it is a very tense situation” (vaticannews 2025-09-16), it can be said with complete certainty that this is not true. And I say this with the enormous pain of a Catholic who seeks to be one seriously (even if he does not succeed), and knowing that the dogma of infallibility, by definition, is restricted to very few and very specific cases, and when I see that Prevost in politics is also inclined to the liberal, dark and woke side.

Of course, the invasion(s) of the airspace(s) of Poland and other NATO nations are a crude false flag operation, since such a dangerous provocation by Russia (unless they like to play Russian roulette) is absolutely unnecessary and, of course, it is highly feasible that, if these allegations are true,  drone wreckage has been used to reconstruct aircraft and simulate these incursions by third parties.

NATO’s wars

And as for the pacifism of the North Atlantic Organization, because I am not prolix, I will put below a brief list of wars initiated by that organization, without mentioning the hundred of those caused individually by its head and owner, the United States of America (USA), especially after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.

1991, 2nd Gulf War (Liberation of Kuwait, Operations Shield and Desert Storm).  Under  UN Resolution 678, the United States, with England, Australia and the support of several NATO nations, up to a total of 42 nations, declared war on Iraq. Let us remember that the nations with the right of veto in the UN Security Council are the five permanent members: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States; that is, there is always a majority of NATO members.

1995, Yugoslavia, Operation Deliberate Force. A massive NATO air bombing campaign against Bosnian servo  targets [i] in Bosnia, 400 aircraft from 15 countries (Spain included, unfortunately). It was born under the protection of the UN Security Council, by its Resolution 816 (1993).

1999, Serbia, Operation Allied Force. From 24 March to 11 June, and without authorisation from the UN Security Council, NATO demanded the withdrawal of Yugoslav troops from Kosovo, then went on to systematically bomb Serbia’s civilian infrastructure (factories, hydroelectric power plants, oil refineries, bridges, public buildings, including the state television station and the Chinese embassy).

2001/3. Afghanistan. After the unclear demolition of the Twin Towers, in December 2001 the United States and its allies invaded Afghanistan and the UN Security Council created the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). NATO took over it in 2003, and it remained in the country until September 2021. With that began what the Yankees have called the “War on Terror.”

2003, 3rd Gulf War (Invasion of Iraq).  The United States (with Bush as president), with England (Blair) and other nations, unfortunately including Spain (Aznar), declared “war to prevent the destruction of the weapons of mass destruction” to Iraq by  hiding behind the falsehood that it possessed weapons of mass destruction (Israel, Korea and other nations had them) and had links with Al Qaeda (an organization in which the Saxon secret services are originally mixed). There was an infrastructure destruction operation frighteningly called “shock and awe“. The war lasted until 2011, when the occupation ended. According to United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, it was an illegal invasion that violated the UN Charter by not having the mandate of the United Nations Security Council.

It is virtually impossible to know the civilian deaths caused by the “War on Terror” in connection with the invasion-occupation of Iraq. The World Health Organization (WHO) in 2008 pointed to about 400,000. The Lancet estimated  them at 655,000 and the Opinion Research Business of London more than a million dead[ii].

2004, Ukraine, Euro-Maidan Orange Revolution. The USA was clearly behind this and other “color revolutions”. This, especially, has meant that NATO has turned to support Ukraine to the point of bordering on World War III at this time. Ukrainian casualties (dead and wounded) are estimated at more than one and a half million fighters, and refugees in other countries more than double.

     2011, Libya. NATO took over U.S. military operations stemming from UN Security Council resolutions. Law No. 1973 authorized air strikes to protect civilians “from the Gaddafi regime,” but, in fact, it focused on the overthrow of the regime, something not provided for in the UN mandate. All of this led to chaos in Libya and led to divergences over NATO’s role.

The same Spanish Socialist Party that opposed NATO in 1980 now advocates going to World War 3 with it.

NATO ‘s metastasis

A NATO action without a UN mandate is a clear violation of international law (Article 1 and Chapter VII of the UN Charter). In any case, the formal illegality according to the UN of the wars in Serbia (1999), Iraq (2003), even Libya (2011) is clear. And also that NATO protected the occupation of part of Cyprus (1974) and Syria (since 2016) and Iraq (since 2019) by Turkey.

And all this within a permanent and transcendental change of its founding statutes, since, after its illegal and bloody intervention in Yugoslavia in 1999, it proclaimed itself a new mission: “the promotion of democratic values, cooperation in matters related to defence and security and the peaceful resolution of disputes, although with the possibility of using military force in crisis management“. [iii]

Its area of action, initially limited to the Euro-Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer, including “the Algerian departments of France (exception that did not apply to the Spanish Places in Africa), the territory of Turkey and the islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area” (Article 5 of the NATO founding Treaty on collective response to an attack on a signatory country), was extended to the rest of the world, in clear opposition to the United Nations’ monopoly on the use of force (Article 51 of the UN Charter). Added to this was the protocol signed on September 23, 2008, although not officially presented to  the Security Council between the Secretaries General of NATO and the UN, Jaap de Hoop-Scheffer and Ban Ki-Moon respectively, by which, with the excuse of peacekeeping operations, NATO was authorized to act almost anywhere in the world[iv].

Moreover, the organization’s membership grew rapidly even after the disintegration of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact (16 new partners and bidding for Ukraine even at the price of a world war), despite NATO’s 1991 pledge not to expand eastward (document “Two-plus-Four talks” found by American political scientist Joshua Shifrinson in question was in the British National Archives): [v]

32 Members of the Organization. USA (in 1949), England (1949), Canada (1949), France (1949), Belgium (1949), Netherlands (1949), Luxembourg (1949), Norway (1949), Denmark (1949), Iceland (1949), Italy (1949), Portugal (1949), Greece (1952), Turkey (1952), Germany (1955), Spain (1982). Czech Republic (1999), Hungary (1999), Poland (1999), Bulgaria (2004), Estonia (2004), Latvia (2004), Lithuania (2004),  Romania (2004), Albania (2009), Croatia (2009), Montenegro (2017), North Macedonia (2020), Finland (2023), Slovakia (2004), Slovenia (2004), Lithuania (2004), Romania (2004), Albania (2009), Croatia (2009), Montenegro (2017), North Macedonia (2020), Finland (2023), Slovakia  (2004), Slovenia (2004), Sweden (2024)

9 “Global Partners“. Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Mongolia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Colombia. They cooperate individually in areas of mutual security, but are not obliged to collective defense. The Colombian case is significant, which breaks the cohesion of the Latin American nations.

 21 “Important non-NATO allies” (MNNA). Australia (1987), New Zealand (1997), Japan (1987), Philippines (2003), Republic of China Taiwan (2022), Thailand (2003), Pakistan (2004), Afghanistan (2012), Israel (1987, with a permanent mission to the Organization since 2017), Egypt (1987), Bahrain (2002), Jordan (1996), Kuwait (2004), Qatar (2022), Morocco (2004); AFRICOM annually conducts the “African Lion” manoeuvres including in Western Sahara (Spanish),Tunisia (2015), Kenya (2024), Brazil (2019), Argentina (1998) and Colombia (2022). It is striking that Israel has accumulated more than a hundred breaches of UN Resolutions, and that Morocco has invaded and occupied the Sahara (and Spanish waters in the Canary Islands) with the approval of Israel and the US, a territory pending decolonisation by Spain according to the same supranational body; also that both “important allies” have repeatedly massacred the indigenous Palestinian and Saharawi populations, despite which they are preferred partners of the European Union, which rewards them with trade policies that ruin its member states.

NATO also created other forums, such as the Partnership for Peace ( PfP) in 1993, supposedly aimed at strengthening NATO’s relations with other European states and the former Soviet Union, up to a total of 21, including Russia.

And the icing on the cake, the Promise of Collective Defense (Article 5 of the Washington Treaty)

Poland, the Baltic States and other NATO members are calling for collective defence against drone incursions supposedly and fancifully “coming from the East”.

Article 5 reads: “The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against all of them and, therefore, agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in the exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, shall be deemed to be an attack on all of them.”, shall assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking immediately, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such measures as it deems necessary (sic), including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Its convoluted wording gives rise to many interpretations. But, historically, what good has it been? Let us look at some significant cases that demonstrate the lack of respect for legality that prevails in NATO.

On June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War between Israel and several Arab nations, the USS Liberty, an electronic reconnaissance (spy) ship deployed in the Mediterranean in international waters near Egypt, after being clearly identified by Jewish air assets, suffered repeated combined attacks by Hebrew fighter-bombers and speedboats.  which, although they did not manage to sink it, caused the death of 34 Yankee sailors. NOTHING HAPPENED. Neither the US reacted individually nor asked for the help of its partners, who did not rush to defend it in any way.

Corporal Francisco Javier Soria, of the Spanish contingent in the United Nations forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL), who was on guard duty at one of the UN watchtowers (specifically the G-7), was killed on 28 January 2015 by a direct hit from an Israeli tank projectile. The murderous attack was masked, surely a wake-up call to the UN to control the Lebanese militias more, saying that it was an abnormal mortar or artillery fire. The Israeli army ended up compensating the victim’s family. With our comrade there were then 292 “blue helmets” killed in Lebanon since 1978, many by hardly excusable fire from Israel. And that’s not to mention the Swedish Count Folke Bernadotte, a United Nations mediator, who was shot dead in 1948, and others until 1978. Spain did not call for NATO’s intervention nor did the UN refuse.

A few days ago, Israel bombed, once again, one of its neighbors: Qatar [vi]. The stated target was the Hamas delegation in negotiating a U.S. proposal for a ceasefire in Gaza. The Jewish planes refueled from British tankers deployed at the Qatari base of Al-Udeid (near Doha, the capital attacked) and had other American support at the same base. It was of no use to Qatar to be “Major Non-NATO Alli -MNNA-” and not support the Palestinian cause. At least half a dozen people died, including a Qatari and four others injured, without giving further details of casualties and damage.

The above reminds me that Italy and Spain each sent warships a few days ago to guard a flotilla of boats traveling to Gaza to support the Gazan cause. It wouldn’t have been surprising if they had been rewarded with some aggression from Israel had they done anything remotely different from the “sham.” If the United States didn’t lift a finger after suffering 34 deaths, do you think NATO would have claimed the much-vaunted Article 5? As a summary, I propose a simple one.

NATO, daughter of the USA and granddaughter of England, is the army of what some Pope Leo, certainly not the current one, called the Synagogue of Satan, today NWO… whose most shameless tool is Zionism (in the words of Tucker Carlson: “Bibi, and I know this because I spoke to people to whom he told it, is touring the Middle East and his own country telling the people who control the USA, control Donald Trump”).

NOTE at the end:

---

[i] Serbia, Iraq and other words have been in secular use and are still accepted today by the RAE, despite the fact that the Anglo-Saxon world insistently fights to impose “Serbia” and “Iraq”.

[ii] How many civilians died in Iraq?, by Owen Bennett-Jones. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/mundo/internacional/2010/08/100830_irak_cifras_muertos_rg.

[iii] Basic aspects https://www.nato.int/nato-welcome/index_es.html#:~:text=POL%C3%8DTICOS:%20la%20OTAN%20promueve%20valores,a%20largo%20plazo%2C%20evitar%20conflictos.

[iv] NATO and its new global role, by Ana Teresa Gutiérrez del Cid, University of Buenos Aires, 2010. file:///C:/Downloads/761-2876-2-PB-1.pdf. 

[v] NATO: Vile Agent Provocateur, by Pedro de Alvarado, 2022. https://www.elespañoldigital.com/la-otan-vil-agente-provocador/#comment-11195.

[vi] Israel’s attack on Doha: “Appeasing Israel doesn’t save you.” https://geoestrategia.eu/noticia/45187/politica/el-ataque-de-israel-a-doha-apaciguar-a-israel-no-te-salva.-analisis.html.