If the U.S. and Russia are Implacable Foes Then All Lines...
Jan 14, 2022 20:01:51 GMT -5
Post by Berean on Jan 14, 2022 20:01:51 GMT -5
January 14, 2022
If the U.S. and Russia are Implacable Foes, Then All Lines of Inquiry Lead to NATO
By Alexander Markovsky and Ted Belman
In 1961, as a young academic, Henry Kissinger had an opportunity to interview President Harry Truman. He asked the former president what in his presidency had made him most proud.
Truman replied, “That we totally defeated our enemies and then brought them back to the community of nations.”
Unfortunately, the U.S. chose not to emulate Truman’s achievement in the years that followed. With the disintegration of the Warsaw Pact, the military threat to Western Europe had ended, but the NATO alliance did not disband itself. Mission accomplished was not good news for the military alliance — it needed new enemies and a new mission for self-preservation.
Indeed, NATO had no difficulty adjusting to the emerging world order. A new enemy was invented — Russia was to be treated as a descendant of the “evil empire.” The concept of an alliance was quietly converted into a doctrine of collective security. The difference is that while alliances are aimed at a specific threat and define the obligation of each partner in case of belligerency, collective security is an ambiguous concept that defines no specific threat and is designed to resist any aggression anywhere in the world. In this new mission, NATO equated peace and security with expanding democratic gains and the proliferation of American values.
In conformance with a new disposition, in the exultant atmosphere of the end of the Cold War, when Russia’s executive power was in a state of paralysis and its military in a state of despair, NATO hastily extended membership to the countries of former Soviet satellite orbit. The projection of a hostile military alliance eastward to within several hundred miles of Moscow could not be long tolerated by Russia irrespective of invocations of goodwill.
After the restoration of her economy and years of heavy investment into the modernization of its armed forces, Russia feels strong enough to confront what she considers a serious threat to her security.
Putin proclaimed his strategy, which was akin to a Russified Monroe Doctrine. It aimed to reassert Russian hegemony around its perimeter, or what Russia has long called its "near abroad."
Russia’s fear is not unfounded. “If you know a country's geography, you can understand and predict its foreign policy,” said Napoleon.
A glance at the map of Europe shows that if Ukraine and Georgia became members of NATO, Russia would be almost entirely flanked by NATO on its European border.
Continued at link
If the U.S. and Russia are Implacable Foes, Then All Lines of Inquiry Lead to NATO
By Alexander Markovsky and Ted Belman
In 1961, as a young academic, Henry Kissinger had an opportunity to interview President Harry Truman. He asked the former president what in his presidency had made him most proud.
Truman replied, “That we totally defeated our enemies and then brought them back to the community of nations.”
Unfortunately, the U.S. chose not to emulate Truman’s achievement in the years that followed. With the disintegration of the Warsaw Pact, the military threat to Western Europe had ended, but the NATO alliance did not disband itself. Mission accomplished was not good news for the military alliance — it needed new enemies and a new mission for self-preservation.
Indeed, NATO had no difficulty adjusting to the emerging world order. A new enemy was invented — Russia was to be treated as a descendant of the “evil empire.” The concept of an alliance was quietly converted into a doctrine of collective security. The difference is that while alliances are aimed at a specific threat and define the obligation of each partner in case of belligerency, collective security is an ambiguous concept that defines no specific threat and is designed to resist any aggression anywhere in the world. In this new mission, NATO equated peace and security with expanding democratic gains and the proliferation of American values.
In conformance with a new disposition, in the exultant atmosphere of the end of the Cold War, when Russia’s executive power was in a state of paralysis and its military in a state of despair, NATO hastily extended membership to the countries of former Soviet satellite orbit. The projection of a hostile military alliance eastward to within several hundred miles of Moscow could not be long tolerated by Russia irrespective of invocations of goodwill.
After the restoration of her economy and years of heavy investment into the modernization of its armed forces, Russia feels strong enough to confront what she considers a serious threat to her security.
Putin proclaimed his strategy, which was akin to a Russified Monroe Doctrine. It aimed to reassert Russian hegemony around its perimeter, or what Russia has long called its "near abroad."
Russia’s fear is not unfounded. “If you know a country's geography, you can understand and predict its foreign policy,” said Napoleon.
A glance at the map of Europe shows that if Ukraine and Georgia became members of NATO, Russia would be almost entirely flanked by NATO on its European border.
Continued at link
