A video to remember: The US and the EU has been expanding to encircle Russia since 1996. Russia must not tolerated.

NATO's Black Sea Expansion: An Unworthy Risk

Moscow insists it opposes NATO expansion in its back yard, but Washington nevertheless goes ahead while whispering soothing reassurances to the Russians. We've seen it in 1996, when Bill Clinton violated clear commitment against expansion made by his predecessor, and again in 2004. Mr. Bush will tried again. It will not work: Putin knows a Russophobic plot when he sees one, and he will not allow a cordon sanitaire to expand into his southern underbelly.

It is noteworthy that opposition to such plans now comes not only from Moscow but from within the alliance. On this issue the old Franco-German EU axis is again in action. French President Sarkozy is known to be lukewarm at best. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany was following the policy of Alleingang (a go-it-alone rapprochement) with Moscow, openly opposing Georgian and Ukrainian chances it was Berlin's bipartisan policy.

From a neoconservative point of view, however, there is no better way to ensure US dominance in perpetuity than subverting Russia. The neocons hate Russia as such, for ideological and emotional reasons. Their obsessions result in policies that resonate with Russia's former clients and satellites in Tallin or Tbilisi, but that are detrimental to the security of the United States.

Further NATO enlargement means that Russian missiles will remain targeted on American cities. By extending her protectorate deep inside Eastern Europe, the US is diminishing, rather than enhancing, her security. By cementing its cordon sanitaire around Russia, Washington indirectly encourages the belief that the bear is on its last legs, which is certainly no longer the case.

The notion of NATO extension pleases some Eastern Europeans who have their own axes to grind notably, those in Warsaw but it can only jeopardize Europe's chances of long-term peace. The United States should understand why the elites in some former Soviet republics have a vested geopolitical interest, and an even more acute psychological need, to treat Russia as the enemy, but she should never allow herself to be seduced by their obsessions. They all proclaim their devotion to the ideological assumptions of the new NATO, but their real agenda is twofolded: to have a Western (read: American) security guarantee against Russia, and to strengthen their own position vis-a-vis those neighbours with whom they have an ongoing or potential dispute. NATO membership has even embolden some to defrost conflicts notably, in Abkhazia and Southern Ossetia that would have otherwise remained dormant.

The reason NATO expansion is bad in principle is found in the security guarantee itself. Article V of the NATO Charter clearly states that an attack on one is an attack on all, which translates into an automatic guarantee of aid to an ally in distress. The United States will supposedly provide her protective cover to new clients right in Russia's geopolitical backyard, in an area whose fortunes are not vital to this country's interests. Once included, those faraway lands of which we know little will become a permanent fixture of our foreign-policy establishment's mind-set. The United States will assume the nominal responsibility for open-ended claims by, say, Tbilisi, over a host of disputed frontiers that were drawn arbitrarily and bear little relation to ethnicity or history. At no obvious benefit to the United States, we would be asked to underwrite a post-Soviet outcome that is not inherently stable, just, or democratic.

Either the United States is serious that she would risk a thermonuclear war for the sake of, say, Georgia's rights to Abkhazia (which is insane), or she is not (which makes NATO expansion frivolous and dangerous). This calls to mind previous Western experiments with security guarantees in the region the carve-up of Czechoslovakia in October 1938, or Poland's destruction in September 1939. Washington's urge to challenge and confront Russia and NATO expansion is an open geopolitical challenge to Moscow, on par with the recognition of Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence is rationally inexplicable. It is reminiscent of an unpleasant and invariably fatal West European malaise that was manifest in the catastrophes of 1812, 1914 and 1941. This madness must be stopped in its current, American-led reincarnation because it is contrary to the interests of the American people and has the potential to destroy the remnant of the common European civilization on both shores of the Atlantic. Such an outcome would be pleasing only to jihadists and creative destructors of all color and hue.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• news
• political
• commercial
• commentary
• analysis
• documentary
• grassroots
• outreach

[jermainekg6]

LOL NYSE(New York Stock Exchange) is being sold to the Germans, Poor Americans have to sell them sells cause their so far in debt, US is done 4, Economic collapse, followed by NorthAmericanUnion as the solutions, Politicans r so clever

[ThirtySixStrategems]

@aviomaster Ok can you stop saying that jeez every Russian Today video i see your comment saying USA should be destroyed by the cccp

[aviomaster]

CCCP should have destroyed USA in 1988

This is the bigest tragedy for humanity of 20th century

[pixelr0]

fuck russia

[xman822]

the nigger reading this so called news is so fuckin stupid! and u can clearly hear its a dumb fuck nigger!

[georgianborat]

And this animal will fuck your mother hahaha

[HomoCallidus]

typical georgian, hopeless animal..

[georgianborat]

suck my cock fuckhead! fuck Russia in da ass!

[georgianborat]

blow me you faggot!

[HomoCallidus]

this comment only shows your ignorance and hatred, and forcing some other stupid people like you to hate not even Russia only, but Georgia, think before you write something. Be a human, not an animal.