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.

Russian Navy Shows How to Negotiate with Pirates

In 2003, the US showed the world that it's quite a folly to have a large army if it can't accomplish anything, as a relatively small US military force routed what was at the time probably one of the top five militaries in the world (on paper at least). 

One wonders what we are getting for our $1 Gazillion, when the Russian Navy can accomplish far more than us with far less:

Following high level complaints about “imperfections” in international law, Russia announced Tuesday that captured Somali pirates “have all died.”
…
The official told Russian news agencies the pirates’ boat disappeared from Russian radar about an hour after their release.

“They could not reach the coast and, apparently, have all died,” the official said.

Totally Awesome.  Why can't they be on our side?

The Russians have just solved the piracy problem, at least as far as their own ships are concerned, with probably a fraction the effort that we and our allies are putting into it.

Возврат в СССР? (Return of the USSR?)

Dark days for the rebellion.

And it was even legit.....I wonder if Yanukovich's American political consultant was an Obama '08 lackey?

Just goes to show you my previous arguments for economics uber alles. The terrible economic morass that Ukraine is in was enough to keep the western minded Ukrainians from voting in large enough droves to offset this travesty. This will be compounded when Moscow relaxes it's stringent energy costs that has frequently been a point of contention between the two countries; a solution that Yanukovich has promised he will solve. For many, the choice whether to get affordable electricity in winter vs Western style competition was a major factor.

What does this mean? For starters, I could say it is a perfect example of the inability of "the march to democracy" to be an inevitable process ; but Putin himself proved that in 2000 (as well as Hitler in the 30's). The next democratic target for Russia will be Georgia. Obviously, Georgia will be a tougher nut to crack due to the massive displeasure over Russia, but it could still assist those politicians that want to take a less confrontational stance with Putin (Interesting article that discusses the displeasure of Yanukovich over Georgian observers and an opposition Georgian MP who sounds a little appeasing of Yanukovich's concerns and seems to imply some sort of willingness to warm up to Russian's Ukranian lackeys ). I think if we're going to exploit any of the gains since the end of the Cold War Obama needs to remain committed to propping up the Georgian government and to do everything to satisfy security concerns by those within Russia's "Near Abroad" (a concern especially felt by the Baltic States during the ABM fiasco). Romania's announcement to hold intercepters is a good start, but we still have a long way to go to undo the lost of confidence .

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.