THE “POWER GUYS” EXTEND THEIR RULE. I think that the Russian invasion of Georgia is one of the most significant events of the last twenty years. I find that my reaction is pretty much covered by previous posts. I pointed out here that the KGB’s assassination of a political opponent on British soil was deliberately conspicuous and provocative. Using a radioactive weapon left dangerous records of the murder all over London. Along with the denials, there was the message that “we can and will do anything we want.” The invasion of Georgia follows the same pattern of sending a message (of course, along with denials): excessive force and obvious evidence of planning.
Categories
Archives
Recent Comments
- ADAPTING GATSBY. (1)
- Mary Jane Schaefer: I think these are crucial, important decisions, what to leave out of any literary work, maybe any...
- DAMIEN HIRST—AN ART MARKET BUBBLE?. (1)
- Kate Bush: I hope you enjoy my visit to the Damien Hirst show as much as I did The Technical Impossibility of...
- THE MOST IMPORTANT EPISODE OF THE SIMPSONS ? (COMMENT). (1)
- Nick: Homer does has success as the team’s best hitter until Mr. Burns places a bet with a rival factory owner...
- THE “RIGHT TO EDIT”. (1)
- Lee: A relevant Simpsons clip.
- ULYSSES—VIRGINIA WOOLF LIKED THE BOOK, DESPISED THE AUTHOR. (3)
- A DEFENSE OF INVASIVE SPECIES. (3)
- Dick Weisfelder: Today’s Toledo Blade has an article on the importation of live Asian carp to Canada to serve...
- Lee: The downside is that red squirrels are way cuter than their gray cousins. Hitchens on the subject.
- THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT). (5)
- frank martin: Have been in a an Al only Roto league since 91… started at Ohio University were we all went to...
- DEATH OF A BUMBLEBEE. (1)
- Nick: By contrast, I remember witnessing the entire thing. I was surprised by Annalisa’s reaction and...
- ANOTHER VOTE ON UMBRIDGE. (1)
- Dick Weisfelder: When I look back at one of the Potter books, it’s usually this one. There are just a lot of...
- THE SCARIEST VILLAIN IN HARRY POTTER? (1)
- Dick Weisfelder: Didn’t we all meet her somewhere in grade or high school?
- ADAPTING GATSBY. (1)
Meta
Did you read the interesting column by Tom Friedman, contending that the real mistake was pushing NATO eastward into former Soviet Republics and allies? Expanding the EU, he argues, was fine, but given Russia’s history, having NATO on their borders and missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic had to be seen as hostile acts perpetrated by an expansive enemy.
I was talking with a friend yesterday who made similar arguments. He contended that we should have invited Russia to join NATO. Is there any implicit guarantee by the EU of the borders of a member? Is membership in the EU for former satellites a provocation? Is there a commitment to these countries that cannot be backed up?
Your questions suggest that NATO expansion was indeed aimed at a Russian threat. That is exactly what Putin argues, namely that the missile shield is an unfriendly act aimed at Russia, not at Iran as the US claims.
I think the real issue is whether economic interdependence between EU state and Russia isn’t a better guarantee of peace than the old Cold War thinking of military alliances. Russia doesn’t seem very alarmed about its former Baltic Republics being in the EU. NATO is a different matter.
Expansion of NATO to the Ukraine would be particularly threatening to Russia, given Ukraine’s large Russian minority and the historical and strategic sensitivity of the Crimea and Donetz Basin. And you are quite correct. Could, would or should NATO be able to defend Ukraine should it become a NATO member and the Russians intervene to protect what they consider legitimate strategic interests?
Putin is constantly portrayed in our media as an out of control autocrat. While his behavior certainly isn’t benign, don’t his arguments make a lot of sense, if we take historic Russian interests and experiences into account?