I would like to share a series of debates that have recently intensified in some international organizations representing the global economic-political system and especially in the think tanks operating in the capitals of NATO.

One of the most striking debate topics is whether the myth of "creating an enemy has backfired." Has the continuous mechanism of creating enemies, intended for the consolidation of the capitalist system and NATO, which deepened after World War II, backfired? In the 21st century, does the act of power centers declaring each other as "enemies" drag the global economic-political system into deeper uncertainty and turmoil? Is the cost-benefit balance of creating "a new Cold War" era signaling greater losses compared to the previous Cold War period?

The second debate topic questions revolve around whether the capitalist system now poses a deeper threat to democracy and human rights. Hence, isn't it time for conscious capitalism, which prioritizes social welfare and equitable distribution of added value over mere profit, and for a new generation of capitalism where state authority prioritizes social peace? Doesn't the old-generation capitalism, which has triggered impoverishment and income inequality even in developed economies, threaten democracy and human rights in these very economies? Doesn't it fuel xenophobia? The third related query examines whether the Western world and NATO are losing their role as stability representatives. This raises the question: Are Western societies losing confidence in their systems, which are purportedly based on global values?

EU's role amid global crises

Specifically, regarding European Union member countries, a fourth critical question asks whether the EU's specific gravity is evaporating in the face of global crises. Considering the recent European Parliament election results, is Brussels struggling significantly to explain centrally shaped global and regional priorities to the societies and voters of EU member countries? In light of global financial criticism of the EU's Mediterranean wing, is this wing acting more realistically and rationally regarding where the global system is heading compared to the countries representing the EU's central and northern wings? Are the strong countries of the EU's southern wing analyzing the rise of the Global South and its increasing weight in the international economic-political system more successfully than the central and northern wings of the EU?

A fifth debate topic questions whether the deepening disagreements between the western and eastern flanks of NATO concerning the Asia-Pacific region can be resolved and whether a consensus on the Asia-Pacific initiative can be formed within the Atlantic Alliance. Can the observed divergences and fluctuations between the two sides of the Atlantic regarding relations with the Global South countries be resolved?

Can the differences in approaches to global and regional geopolitical tensions between the ocean and land groups within NATO, as well as the differing views between governments and social segments in these countries, be reconciled? All the debate topics listed above will essentially clarify the future position of NATO in the global economic-political system. Will the opinion leaders of NATO sufficiently scrutinize these issues and take them seriously, and how will the answers they formulate affect NATO's future position?

We will follow this closely together.