The NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) was created to divert its members, of which 28 are in Europe and 2 in North America, to evade war against Global threats. The creation of such an organization was to clarify the intent of security threats to millions of people and use their resources plus their combined political might to avert the obsolete occurrence of the irreplaceable concept of war out of the sleeves of the political leaders. The article is about Security Threat in The World.
The geopolitical breakdown of the reasons for a global calamity and, in this case, a war in Europe cannot define the utter need for the invasion to show regional supremacy. Moreover, the delight in the fascist reigns to enjoy the temporary breakdown of the backbone of any nation should in itself be a case of collapse concerning the people who advocate it. The degree to which the power of Nations cannot always be calculated through their political and economic might.
The power of people to deviate away from the window of opportunity to make a pathway to destroying the economic might in the first place and then make headways to severe relationships and ties with their Friends (Other nations with similar agendas) cannot always end up in positions of favor for them. Therefore, the political endeavor should coincide with what the country’s ordinary citizens want for themselves.
There can be a community at its simplest who would want nothing but for prosperity to enter people’s lives, and when the bloodshed ignores otherwise, we cannot tell for sure why the invasion happened in the first place. Maybe as redundancy of National interest, the citizen may be unaware of what has been going around at conference tables under closed curtains in the numerable meeting hosting the country’s leaders.
However, there is an intersection point between common interest and the imbued concurrence of leaders to mark their ideas with the most important tool they have-democracy-and subvert anything else coming in the path of making the important decision in their lives of the people of a particular country. The war has been going on, and the intensity of it will not dim as far as there exists a difference of opinion: The long age attitudes of regimes and governments towards creating a domineering attitude to fill the gap between the want of the individual and what the government has set for it becomes the ill-fated notion from which there can be no utter escape.
And as this widens, the divide between the utopic vision of conquering barriers and breaking boundaries the reality becomes desperately fathomable. As the situation dampens and reaches a state of arbitration, the minute calling of the general public when it’s most needed is ignored, creating the vacuum of the loss of trust in the government, which removes the veils of economic prosperity financial dominance. People’s lives are at risk, and taking over another nation will do little to help, only that adds to the trouble that the nation will face for decades to come, both economic and political.
The infrastructure condition of a particular country completely depends on the resources the country has (Man Power, Reserves, and Commodity), and it can be developed with time. Leaders who take shortcuts can in no way believe that using the military might conquer another nation, and using its resources as its own can be absolutely detrimental. The most inadvertent way the countries with regimes nodding towards autocratic activities on a large scale will understand that it was not about the takeover or a show of power; countries who lack it will not have it even though they have abundant resources.
The gist is that using resources and not the lack of them is the cause of failure; even with little, a lot can be done to seize failure and loom in a culture of economic activity. The most important proponent of Russia-Ukraine has been the one-sidedness of the war and then the regrettable show of military power in the name of regional might. By using the network of other governments like the G7 and G20, further expansion of the Military agenda can be controlled if not stopped.
The countries that now go against the norms and rules of international politics have been punished with tough economic sanctions and the disability to do business with other friendly cooperators. And that cannot be the likelihood for all who disagree-the propulsion of economic might of a country like China, which hold considerable economic and military power right after the US, can help create more sociopathic leaders who will go down the drain to destroy others along with themselves.
The UN security council and the general assembly have helped maintain global peace for a long time. Peace is not only that of violent extremism but that of the inner balance of the mental state, which on a mass basis can create external calamities with enough propensity to undergo a shift in the transition of power. The utter urgency of the world to be in a series of states of war and then on peace and vice versa in that order can help most people overcome what they truly have to cross-not a boundary or a social or environmental construct.
But the battle to win the war with the place where we keep the natural attitude of a human being- and the innermost place in our heart where we mind that the need for peace comes from the love for it. The power of regimes like Russia and their co-conspirators still not known will have a limit just like every other Fascist regime has, and the extent to which their behavior pattern has varied three-sixty degrees can fool anyone no more. If this Russia-Ukraine war isn’t a reminder of what happens when the whistle is not blown in the first place, we can expect more wars like this in the future.
Engr. Samin Shadman Zahir
Contributor, The InCAP
To read more Perspective Views, Please Click Here!