but for some reason, few are familiar with "The Bush Doctrine II", which is "building NATO = deconstructing U.N."
Posted on 04/01/2008 11:42:44 AM PDT by jhpigott
BUCHAREST (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush vowed on Tuesday to press for Ukraine and Georgia to be allowed to start the process of joining NATO despite resistance from Russia and skepticism from the alliance's European members.
Bush, in Kiev on his way to his farewell NATO summit in Romania beginning on Wednesday, said Moscow had no right to veto bids by the two former Soviet republics to join the 26-nation Western defense pact.
But French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said Paris would oppose giving Kiev and Tbilisi a "Membership Action Plan" -- a roadmap to joining NATO -- to avoid upsetting the balance of power with Russia. Germany shares those objections.
Bush told a news conference with Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko: "In Bucharest this week, I will continue to make America's position clear. We support MAP for Ukraine and Georgia.
"Helping Ukraine move towards NATO membership is in the interest of every member in the alliance and will help advance security and freedom in this region and around the world."
Bush will repeat that message in a pre-summit speech on Wednesday and add that "NATO membership must remain open to all of Europe's democracies that seek it, and are ready to share in the responsibilities of NATO membership."
On other summit issues, Greece said it was unlikely to resolve a dispute over the name of NATO aspirant Macedonia in time for the former Yugoslav republic to be invited to join the alliance this week despite strong pressure from Washington.
And Fillon told parliament in Paris that France may send a few hundred extra troops to Afghanistan to help NATO's biggest military mission, apparently fewer than the 1,000 combat troops President Nicolas Sarkozy was expected to announce in Bucharest. Continued...
ping
Why don’t we just admit Kosovo while we’re at it.
And let's enroll Taiwain. Then, recognize Tibet's independence and enroll them as well so we can piss of the Chinese, also.
...which, by enrolling every Juan, Ivan and Ahmed will end by making NATO as bureaucratically useless and strategically pointless as the UN.
Bush is making a foreign policy blunder on par with Ferdinand driving through Sarajevo without a bodyguard.
Pooty ain’t gunna be happy...
For decisions in NATO President Bush needs unanimity. Since practically everybody in western continental Europe is strictly against either a Georgian and/or a Ukrainian membership their entry into NATO is quite improbable.
Besides - at least in the Ukraine a majority of the people is against a NATO membership. The “best” poll is 45% pro and 55% against. Before we talk about a membership the Ukrainians should be sure if they want really to be in NATO or not. Maybe you remember Spain and its inconsequent standing in Iraq after their former leader Aznar joined the war in a complete contrast to the will of his compatriots. In democracies it is difficult to push through political concepts against the sovereign, the people (and voters).
A NATO membership is not appropriate to stabilize neither Georgia nor the Ukraine. The Russians will do whatever they want - with or without NATO since they are not vanquishable in their sphere of influence. Due to their nuclear ability and their conventional arsenal they could invade Georgia and Ukraine without any fear. Neither America nor Europe will risk a global thermonuclear war because of those two countries. NATO members would only come into some fundamental ethic problems then since they should help their (in the case of a membership) partners but could do practically nothing but dump them. Wrong promises are the worst we all can think of. Just think of Poland after being betrayed in Yalta.
It is kind of funny that, during the Cold War, our objective was to contain the Soviets by using/exapnding NATO to encircle the Soviet Union. Now, the same people who are arguing that the Cold War never ended are arguing precisely the opposite.
Can you explain that in a little more detail? I've never advocated that the Cold War never ended.
Just poke around some of the comments on the “Putin is a commie” threads. Then consider some of the comments that suggest “Putin must be placated.”
—Are we willing to treat an attack on Ukraine as an attack on the United States? We are making a lot of promises that I doubt we have the capability or willingness to keep. —
Exactly. Expanding NATO to Russia’s doorstep is a singularly *bad* idea. We’re too overextened as is. Besides, what is NATO’s reason for being since the USSR broke up almost 17 years ago?
Russia lost the cold war. Ukraine and Georgia have a right to Nato membership without a veto by Russia.
The correct question. It is sheer lunacy on the administration's part.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.