Redstate

By Skanderbeg Posted in Foreign Affairs — Comments (32) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Promoted by AE because this issue should be on everyone's radar. There's more here.

(Scroll down to the end for the update - so as to not interfere with new readers of this.)

This is probably on no one's radar screen, but next week is going to be a very interesting one, with considerable long-term implications.

Do read on.

A whole bushel-basket of difficult issues are coming to a head later next week at the annual NATO summit meeting, which is going to be held in Bucharest. President Bush will be attending, and the summit is a stop on a larger (and very Skanderbeg-like :-) ) itinerary that begins in Kyiv (Kiev), moves on to Bucharest, then on to Croatia, and finally ends with a backtracking to Sochi (Russia).

There are a lot of things going on here, so let's try to use the President's itinerary to sort through it all.

The first stop is in Kyiv (Kiev), which essentially amounts to a preparation meeting for Bucharest. I'm in Ukraine relatively regularly, and it's funny how in recent years all the fractures and fault-lines in Europe seem to play out either in or with-regard-to Ukraine.

In recent years, Ukraine has been riven by a debate about what it should do vis-a-vis NATO. There is both a strong interest in moving toward NATO membership (as a way of cementing Ukraine's exit from a 350-year-long domination by Russia), and in avoiding NATO and retaining those "historic" sympathies and connections. There's just enough of an edge to the first viewpoint that Ukraine is hoping to be invited into the NATO "Membership Action Plan" (MAP) - which is basically a statement of intent from NATO to an aspiring country; the MAP states that the applicant country can be permitted to start down the road to membership and is given a road-map of conditions and standards (mostly bringing-up-to) that it is expected to fulfill, at the end of which it will be granted membership.

Not surprisingly, Russia is apoplectic about this development. But here's the thing to keep in mind - the bear can growl, but it has little power to influence events. I've had the chance to watch this going on in person in recent years (e.g., see this; Ukraine is sliding further and further away from Russia, and there's nothing Russia can do about it. This is significant and telling - Russia is not strong now, and don't let yourself backslide into thinking that it is just because the old USSR was such a (real) menace for so long. If you look at events, the only place where Russia has been able to influence events has been in the Transdniestr region - in other words, big, "strong" Russia is only able to pick on.... Moldova.

So next week, after President Bush's visit, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko will also journey to Bucharest to ask that Ukraine be entered into the NATO MAP process.

However, this may be problematic. Why? Good question. The majority of the present NATO members support Ukraine's accession into the MAP. That list includes, loudly and publicly, the US, Canada, and the eastern European member countries.

But.... well, guess who's back:

French and German leaders are leading the resistance to a Ukrainian MAP, in what some analysts are describing as the first time a non-NATO state, the Russian Federation, may impede a NATO decision through proxies, violating a key NATO principle of not giving veto influence to non-members.

“That principle could be breached for the first time in the alliance’s history, if Berlin and Paris lead an action to block the Georgian and Ukrainian MAPs at the Bucharest summit in deference to Russia’s opposition,” Vladimir Socor, a senior fellow at the Jamestown Foundation in Washington, wrote for the Eurasia Daily Monitor.

Yep. The infamous "Axis of Weasels" is back, with a vengeance. What are the weasels proposing?

French and German leaders may advocate for creating a neutral zone between NATO and the Russian Federation, consisting of Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia, Socor reported.

Well, this is a shocker. In the first case, it seems like a bad revival of German Chancellor Willy Brandt's disgusting "Ostpolitik" of the 1970s - which amounted to trying to turn Germany into some sort of supposed "neutral zone" in the middle of Europe as a buffer between NATO and the Warsaw Pact - though what it really meant was the slow Finlandization (!) of Germany into a quasi-Warsaw-Pact entity. Even worse, though, ponder what's going on in such a proposal - particularly if you are a citizen of Ukraine, Moldova, or Georgia. Sorry, but you have no say in the matter. Your betters, France and Germany, will put up a fence and ban you from westernizing, so that we can have a buffer zone between those of us already in "the club" and Russia. This amounts de facto to selling off the freedom of others for the illusion of protecting yourself from trouble. Neville Chamberlain must be shaking his head in his grave.

Why are France and Germany so scared of Russia's wrath? Well:

Europe is far more susceptible to Russian natural gas and oil prices than the US, receiving a quarter of its supply from Russia, which views Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia as its rightful sphere of influence.

This is a sad statement about the present condition of "old Europe." Russia is weak, but "old Europe" is now so enfeebled that it can't even fed off Russian threats. They (old Europe) should be ashamed of themselves for fading to the point where they can be rolled in this fashion.

There's a second piece in here that has to be made clear - both to Russia and to the cowards of old Europe. We Americans, like our forebears in the Roman Republic, do not recognize "spheres of influence". If these countries want to be free and open to the world, we will not trade them away to appease either the aggressive or the cowardly. Carthage and the Hellenistic monarchies never grasped this fundamental difference of Rome (vs. their own entrenched thinking), and we'd better make it crystal clear to both Russia and the Weasels.

Oh, and there's also this:

“Germany, at Russia’s behest, has led the way in mobilizing ‘old Europe’ to oppose NATO’s invitation to Ukraine into a MAP,” said Taras Kuzio, a visiting assistant professor of international affairs at The George Washington University.

I went on at length above about how the Weasel countries seem to be willing to trade away other countries for their own selfish purposes. But if you are from Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, or Poland, the paragraph above should cause you to twitch uncontrollably. Germany and Russia had a grand old division agreement back in 1939 - and believe me, the Ribbentrop/Molotov agreement is still remembered there with the greatest fury. This is a farcical rerun of one of the greatest betrayals in history.

And one last note. It's not just Germany and France - it's the whole Axis of Weasels and then some:

The Netherlands are against Ukraine’s and Georgia’s joining NATO in near future. Foreign Minister of the Netherlands Maxime Verhagen stated on Wednesday in his speech in the Holland parliament.

So, the Netherlands joined the position of Germany, France, Belgium and Luxemburg [sic - ed.]. The USA and the Great Britain have the opposite points of views, they want Ukraine and Georgia to become NATO members as soon as possible.

(Emphasis mine.)

If you follow the link, you'll see that there are some weasel (!) words about "maybe it's best for them to wait a year" - but we all know what they really mean.

So this is worth watching next week. Georgia is important, but Ukraine is the big bowl of borshch. And keep track of this rare convergence-demonstration of all the fault lines.

In brighter news, another agenda item is the expected formal invitation to the "ACM" (Albania, Croatia, Macedonia) countries to join NATO. The ACM countries joined the MAP several years back, and have walked all the necessary steps. This is good news.

Well.... there is unfortunately one possible sour note in all this and yet another fault line to worry about. Greece is objecting to the invitation that's being extended to Macedonia, since Greece objects (I'm not making this up) to the country having that name. Contrary to what they say, the Greek objections have little to do with events of the 4th century B.C. and a great deal to do with events of the late 19th century and early 20th century - but all that is a topic for another day.

I hate to say it, but a good rule of thumb in the Balkans is that if Greece objects to something, it's probably a good idea. The foreign minister of Macedonia, Antonio Milososki (n.b. - I'd really like to see his family tree with a name like that), has an very eloquent piece in today's Wall Street Journal arguing (cogently) for Macedonia's inclusion in NATO.

So here's what we should hope for next week from Bucharest, and I'll take the occurrence of these as being very good news:

o The formal extension of NATO membership to Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia;
o The formal invitation to Ukraine and Georgia to join the MAP program and begin the journey that "ACM" are finishing.

From Bucharest, President Bush moves on to Croatia. I honestly don't know the formal reason for the visit, but it's probably in anticipation of the formal extension of NATO membership to Croatia. I think he's going to Zagreb, but if anyone in the planning is on the ball, they'll relocate proceedings to Dubrovnik.

After Croatia, President Bush ends the week by backtracking (since this is a recent scheduling addition) to Sochi in southern Russia to meet with Vladimir Putin. If you want another reason why bad old Vlad is more bark than bite.... he spends more time in Sochi than he does in Moscow. I can't say that I blame him (Sochi is more like Capri than it is like Moscow), but if he's so lazy that he'd rather lounge around in Sochi than call the shots in Moscow.... then he's no neo-Stalin. Apparently, Vlad wants to try one more time to talk President Bush out of missile defense, but I suspect it won't work. Hopefully, this one will be simple - Vlad complains, President Bush nods and says "Thanks for your input," briefs Vlad on how great things went in Kyiv, Bucharest, and Zagreb.... and then they go for a walk in Sochi's lovely botanical gardens.

It can be wished that this trip will get considerable coverage, but that seems unlikely, beyond some mood video of President Bush getting some tourist time at Kyiv's magnificent Orthodox churches.

But watch all this carefully. It's going to be a decisive week all along the way next week.

Update.

I dithered about whether or not I should add this update, but IJB's wondrous comment inspired me to go ahead and add this.

Because of my business interests in Ukraine, I'm on the mailing list of the US-Ukraine Foundation.

Earlier today, they sent out this e-mail alert:

We urge all our members and concerned Ukrainian Americans and their supporters to call the White House Comment Line at 1 202-456-1111 to urge that President George W. Bush lay a wreath at the Holodomor Memorial in Kyiv during his upcoming visit on April 1, 2008.

We have been given to understand that the President's office, when offered an invitation to do so, has given a counter proposal to lay a wreath only at the site of Ukraine's Unknown Soldier. While such an act of respect is appreciated, the victims of the Terror Famine were not in a position to defend themselves militarily.

We therefore strongly feel - if the President is to perform only one such ceremonial act of remembrance - that it is more fitting and responsive to the Ukrainian nation that this genocide perpetuated by Stalin be uniquely honored.

This situation is a bit of a surprise, since it would be pretty close to being a diplomatic gaffe. The haunting Holodomor Memorial is something of a sanctus sanctus in contemporary Ukraine.

If President Bush is going to be doing any wreath-laying in Kyiv next week, this is where it should be.

One wonders what's going on in Washington on this one. I can easily believe that it's staff cluelessness in the White House: "Whenever we have someone do a wreath-laying here, they do it at the Unknown Soldier Monument. Have they got one of those there? And what's this 'Humidor Memorial' anyway?"

However, one does hope that this isn't more numptiness from the usual suspects at the State Department, who are afraid of "upsetting Russia."

I don't know if flooding the switchboard does any good. But if anyone is reading this who can talk to anyone who matters.... please tell them to get this done right. The Ukrainians are extending a very high honor to President Bush by offering him the opportunity to place a wreath at the Holodomor Memorial. Land sakes, don't snub them - take it!