Defense Secretary Gates Consults RTP&GG, rips NATO Allies

Secretary of Defense Gates, who served in that position in the second half of the Bush Administration as well as the 1st half of the Obama Administration, consulted RTP&GG, and decided his farewell speech would be a good time to absolutely hammer NATO.  I've got nothing to add to it.  Just read the Washington Post article.  A couple of killer quotes:

“The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the U.S. Congress, and in the American body politic writ large, to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources ... to be serious and capable partners in their own defense,” he said in an address to a think tank in Brussels.

and:

In Libya, Gates said, “the mightiest military alliance in history is only 11 weeks into an operation against a poorly armed regime in a sparsely populated country, yet many allies are beginning to run short of munitions, requiring the U.S., once more, to make up the difference.”

Pathetic.

To continue to rap on my theme: international organizations don't work when the populations of some countries think those of others in the organization aren't pulling their weight or are trying to rip them off. "Coaltions of the willing" will be the wave of the future in both military and economic arenas.  The international organizations themselves have zero power.  Power rests in the wills of the member countries/populations.

The End of NATO? Visegrad Group Forms

With the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, many predicted that NATO's relevence would disappear too, as the post-WWII threat to Europe's security had disappeared.  NATO did react to the 9/11 attacks on a member state (USA) by assisting America in Afghanistan.  NATO did not follow the US into Iraq, but it was a war of choice by the US and therefore, it could be rationalized that it was not a war requiring NATO assistance.  Many NATO countries (chiefly the UK as usual) did assist us regardless. 

Many Americans wonder why we have bases in Europe when there is no threat there, or when a perceived threat (such as a nuclear Iran or a resurgent-but-greatly reduced Russia) should be handled by Europeans themselves.  My own opinion at this point is that we should have Air Force and Navy agreements with European countries for bases to use as trans-shipment points, and to serve as a tripwire for US involvement should a really big attack happen, but that all major Army bases and most of the AF and Navy bases should be vacated.  It's time Europeans were responsible for their own defense.

Now NATO has initiated a war of choice with Libya.  I support the effort, but it certainly is not  a war that NATO was ever intended to fight.  This is even more a war of choice than Iraq was.  NATO is officially participating, but one of its main members, Germany, is not participating.  The US, after bearing the brunt of the early work has backed off to a support role, and it is now mainly a British, French, and Italian effort.  What exactly the point is, is not entirely clear, as has been pointed out in a previous RTP&GG post. 

Clearly, the original rationale for NATO, to protect European democracies from external threat, has all but disappeared and NATO is looking for a reason for being.  Even strong pro-military, pro-western democracy guys like me are wondering why it's still there.

A new development that has occurred under the media radar is showing that some NATO member nations still take NATO's original (and only) reason for being seriously, but that they don't trust NATO to serve that role.  Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia have formed a cooperative military group, focused on repelling a Russian invasion...the very thing NATO is intended for.  I'm pretty sure all these countries are recent joiners of NATO.  Doubtlessly, they read the tea leaves after Russia's bullying adventure in NATO-wannabee country, Georgia, saw NATO's ineffectual response, and are acting accordingly.  These countries, long-suffering under the Soviet boot in the Cold War, now worry very much about the Russians, and don't believe they can count on NATO to do the job it was expressly created to do.  As the article points out, they are worried that Germany is now focused economically on Russia and may not be greatly motivated to help out the smaller Eastern European countries,

The Germans obviously are struggling to shore up the European Union and questioning precisely how far they are prepared to go in doing so. There are strong political forces in Germany questioning the value of the EU to Germany, and with every new wave of financial crises requiring German money, that sentiment becomes stronger. In the meantime, German relations with Russia have become more important to Germany. Apart from German dependence on Russian energy, Germany has investment opportunities in Russia. The relationship with Russia is becoming more attractive to Germany at the same time that the relationship to NATO and the EU has become more problematic.

The formation of the Visegrad group is, in a way, heartening, as it shows individual countries forming alliances to meet specific threats, and not having to depend on the US to save them. For this old Cold Warrior, it's sad to see NATO coming to an end, but it's now an alliance without an enemy. Hard to justify. The US needs to approach things more like the Visegrad group, forming alliances with good friends for good reasons.

This also is one more step in the collapse of the vast transnational groups, and is heartening in that way too. The UN, long past its useful life, NATO past its useful life, the European Union in slow-motion collapse, etc. I don't know if the IMF is close to collapse or not, but the recent scandal involving its leader revealed to us that the head of the IMF was a Socialist. WTF?! I see approaching irrelevency there too.

Devil Comes Down To Georgia: Update

Finally before I leave, how 'bout a look at where our past observations have gone? We don't shy away from facts at Robinson Talking Points. I was raving like World War V was upon us in Devil Comes Down To Georgia (for ref: WWIII = Cold War, WWIV = War Against Militant Islam). Who was going to blink in early May? Clearly the West, who didn't have a chance against a determined Putin. Well, what has been happening? The US press has ignored it completely. The London Telegraph has an article by a Russian writer who claims both sides have ratcheted up tension in advance of the long-scheduled, small-scale NATO exercise, but that Russia is making a big deal of it as an excuse to bulk up their troops in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Well, ominous, but no WWV.

In searching for more stories, I stumbled on an Estonian paper Eesti Elu or 'Estonian Life', that has a good, honest article on it. Looks like the exercise is carrying on but WWV isn't happening, but the Russians are still increasing their troops in the area.

Another article discussed a topic I find interesting but never see talked about: the status of the city of Kaliningrad, Russia, or what was formerly known as Koenigsberg, Prussia. This 'exclave' of Russia is sandwiched between Poland and Lithuania on the Baltic coast. It used to be the capital of Prussia, and was the heartland of the German military class, the Junkers, that were the driving force in unifiying Germany. I always wondered why Kaliningrad didn't break away from Russia at the end of the cold war, but never heard anything about it. Well, this article at least discusses the fact that changing the name back to Koenigsberg is being debated, which is a small first step towards independence. Evidently the Russians have kept this exclave stocked full of troops, but now they can't afford to keep them there anymore, and...what a coincidence...we see an effort to change the name of the exclave now that the Russian troops are leaving.

The Devil Comes Down To Georgia

Here we go! Vlad is back, itching for an excuse with Georgia, saying to Obambi, "what's it gonna be, boy?" This is high stakes stuff: NATO has scheduled an excercise with Georgia in early May, so Vlad steps things up right before. Talk about effin' balls. We're gearing up to go in to work with our potential new NATO member and he's saying, "dudes, this is MY turf". If we mean business we need to face Russia down, but at the same time they've deployed the Black Sea Fleet! This is more high stakes than the first invasion because we are actually gearing up to go to Georgia, which we weren't doing before. Dang...these would be exciting times if the West had a leader with any balls, but, since we don't, this humble reporter is predicting Game Over for our brave but probably foolish friends in Georgia. I don't even think we should try to pick a fight with Russia in Georgia, but now would be the time to go full-speed-ahead with the anti-missile system in Poland and the Czech Republic, but Obambi has already preemptively de-nutted the West's ability to respond in this way. What a dink.

I've got to say, I wish Vlad The Impaler were our President (assuming he supported Free Market Capitalism and Invidivual Rights of course). This is what a real leader of a powerful nation does for his country.