Monday, 18 August 2008

Georgia In NATO

Am the only person who sometimes feels that someone has turned over two pages at once to leave me frantically searching for the part i missed that allowed the person to reach the conclusion that they have?
There was a NATO summit not so long ago where the issue of Georgia being allowed into NATO was shot down in flames by Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, who gave a nod towards the camp that suspected the Georgian President was too much of a loose cannon.
Move on a few months and days after Georgia have razed a city to the ground with missiles, killed over 2000 foreign nationals and provoked a war with one of the greatest military arsenals on the planet and then bizarelly it's 'hold on, maybe Georgia should be in NATO after all.'
Just in case Maerkel has forgotten, the premiss of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation is that 'an armed attack against one or more of them shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that each of them will assist the Party attacked by taking such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force'.
The only thing different between when Merkel said no and now is that Georgia have started a calamitous War but far from distancing themselves from it with a 'told you so' glance towards George Bush, the decision is being discussed that it should now be bought into NATO so next time it decides to pick a fight with Russia, and Saakashvili will the first chance he gets, it will do so knowing that it won't just be a relatively minor 5 day conflict confined to East Europe, it will draw in the likes of America, Britain, Canada, Germany, France and Turkey to face off against Russia.
Why is that the West couldn't do enough to help Albanians in Kosovo but are quite content to leave Russians in Ossettia to their fate? Same difference isn't it?
Inviting a nation to join an Organisation like NATO while it's guns are still smoking and it's victims are still digging out their dead, would be one of the worst possible moves in history and no amount of oil and gas being piped through Georgia is worth starting a World War over, and certainly not for a man like Saakashvili who would be in the Hague for crimes against humanity if it wasn't for his friends in high places. Think again Merkel.

8 comments:

David G said...

The big players in Europe and America couldn't give a stuff about Georgia. All their huffing and puffing is about protecting their own nations and adding further to their capitalist wealth.

Ultimately, it's about securing control of oil and gas and strategic territory!

Lucy said...

Very true david and even a blind man with cataracts can see where that is taking us. Nobody actually cares about Georgia, all this hot air about defending democracy and freedom is for the ears of those who are either too lazy or don't care to find out what it really is about. Unfortunatley there are a lot of them listening.

Anonymous said...

Lucy,

I dont believe all the democracy stuff. It is just rheotric that goes all the way back to the Truman era (stop communism) that presidents "have" to repeat even now. Clinton used it. The next president will use it too.

It is all about national self-interest. The US and Russia will ally against the UK and vice-versa if the circumstances call for it...

Personally, I'm all for the US getting completely out of Europe. The Eruo's can defend themselves, or not.

Ditto Taiwan and Guam.

Q

David G said...

Congratulations, Anonymouse, you've finally said something meaningful!

The next step is how to set up a world where national self-interest is not the principal motivator but what is good for humanity is.

Lucy said...

I agree Q but i would go further and say not just America but everyone just keep their nose out of other countries business and stop meddling.
I also agree with you completely david about a world where humanity comes before self interest.

Cody Bones said...

So I guess your not a disciple of Ayn Rand, and the philosophy of Objectivism which preaches acting in your own rational self interest? Pity...

Anonymous said...

Cody - Rand's books were kinda fun to read, but I never thought of them as much of a philosophy. Little more than Darwin focused on humans, or a restatement of Adam Smith and the Invisible Hand.

David - I have never doubted your motivation. I have also never accepted your goal as attainable. I consider it idealistic (by definition unachievable).

Humans are driven by their fears. I think it is a built-in survival mechanism. The only people that don't seem to be driven by their fears are people that are absolutely desolate and completely hopeless. The Mother Teresa's and Ghandi's are revered because they are once in a lifetime exceptions. If you can eliminate fear, maybe you can implment selflessness... but I doubt it in my bones and DNA.

You don't seem to be a theist, but have probably heard the story of Adam, Eve, Cain, and Able. Per the story there were four people in the world and in that world Eve was gullible and manipulative, Adam was a naive victim, Able was a prideful victim, and Cain was a jealous and prideful murderer. Seems to be the human condition...

If the U.S. pulls back into its shell (which is unlikley because it can hardly do so without dire economic consequences for the U.S.) it won't end the use of global nationalism or agressive military action. Further, it won't end suffering and oppression. Europe let Hilter run roughshod on the Chezcks and Poland. Then, Europe let the USSR run roughshod on the Chezcks and Poland. Georgia wasn't always part of the USSR... Taiwan and Japan will probably suffer - who is going to step up to confront the Chinese?

I understand your motivation. I understand your objective. I don't even begin to buy the logic or rationale. "Imagine no possessions" makes a good song. Sadly, that's about all it does.

Q

David G said...

Anonymous, your thoughtful, supportive comment is appreciated.

Those of us who are valiantly trying to make the world a little better quite often seem to be under attack by all and sundry. It tends to make one a little touchy!

I guess that most humans, being group animals, fear change and prefer instead to shoot the messenger.

I see things about humans that really frighten me. How to change these genetic flaws is the problem.

Cheers.