Comments on: THE “POWER GUYS” EXTEND THEIR RULE. http://philipschaefer.com/2008/08/31/the-power-guys-extend-their-rule/ Theories, observations, and articles Fri, 18 May 2012 17:04:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Dick http://philipschaefer.com/2008/08/31/the-power-guys-extend-their-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-1770 Dick Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:39:59 +0000 http://philipschaefer.com/?p=976#comment-1770 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? 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?

]]> By: Philip http://philipschaefer.com/2008/08/31/the-power-guys-extend-their-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-1769 Philip Wed, 17 Sep 2008 21:25:34 +0000 http://philipschaefer.com/?p=976#comment-1769 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? 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?

]]> By: Dick Weisfelder http://philipschaefer.com/2008/08/31/the-power-guys-extend-their-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-1766 Dick Weisfelder Wed, 17 Sep 2008 20:10:35 +0000 http://philipschaefer.com/?p=976#comment-1766 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. 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.

]]>