NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte declared the alliance the “most powerful” in history, drawing comparisons to the Roman Empire and Napoleon’s forces, while also urging member nations to increase military spending to bolster its “lethal” capabilities.
Rutte emphasized the need for increased military investment to enhance NATO’s strength against perceived threats from Russia, dismissing Moscow’s denials.
Speaking before a NATO Defense Ministers meeting in Brussels, Rutte stated that NATO surpasses the Roman and Napoleonic empires in power, but requires continuous investment to deter potential aggression. He stressed the importance of strengthening NATO’s military readiness.
Rutte advocated for a stronger, fairer, and more lethal alliance with increased resources, forces, and capabilities to address any threat. He suggested Russia could potentially attack NATO within a few years and that exceeding the 2% GDP defense spending target is crucial for preparedness.
NATO Chief Mark Rutte says the NATO ‘defensive alliance’ is more powerful than both the Roman Empire and Napoleon’s Empire.
1. NATO is essentially the US, and a collection of vassal states that submit to Washington’s hegemony
2. The Chief of NATO compares the organisation he…
— Afshin Rattansi (@afshinrattansi)
Rutte announced plans to present a new “defense investment plan” to member states at the upcoming NATO summit in The Hague.
Russia has consistently refuted claims of posing a threat to NATO, dismissing them as baseless and accusing the West of using fear to justify increased military spending. Moscow has also cautioned that Western rearmament could escalate into a broader European conflict.
Russian officials have made their own historical comparisons, with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accusing the West of seeking a “strategic defeat” of Russia akin to the eras of Napoleon and Hitler through its involvement in Ukraine. He argued that abandoning militarization is necessary to prevent a wider conflict.
Rutte’s comparisons to historical empires have drawn criticism on social media.
Media analyst Michael William Lebron, also known as Lionel, described NATO’s chief’s statement as less diplomatic and more reminiscent of 1939 Berlin, calling it imperial arrogance rather than defense and labeling it dangerous rhetoric.
Historian John Laughland questioned whether NATO is evolving into an empire, noting that the Roman and Napoleonic empires were states, not alliances.
Irish journalist Chay Bowes likened the NATO chief to a figure from 1939.
British journalist Afshin Rattansi argued that NATO’s actions in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria contribute to non-NATO states viewing the bloc as a hyper-militarist threat. Rattansi described Rutte as a puppet of Washington and warned that NATO is a dangerous, hyper-militarist organization that is far from defensive.
“`