« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Talking Points Memo Does Not Understand The NATO Charter

Color Me Unsurprised

By: Dan McLaughlin (Diary)  |  September 11th, 2008 at 08:01 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

TPM’s David Kurtz headlines an excerpt of Gov. Palin’s interview with Charlie Gibson tonight “Palin Foreign Policy: War with Russia.” Kurtz is working off an alarmist ABC News headline “EXCLUSIVE: GOV. SARAH PALIN WARNS WAR MAY BE NECESSARY IF RUSSIA INVADES ANOTHER COUNTRY”

Unfortunately for Kurtz’s effort to make Gov. Palin into Dr. Strangelove, his post includes a direct quote from the interview:

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn’t we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help.

But NATO, I think, should include Ukraine, definitely, at this point and I think that we need to — especially with new leadership coming in on January 20, being sworn on, on either ticket, we have got to make sure that we strengthen our allies, our ties with each one of those NATO members.

We have got to make sure that that is the group that can be counted upon to defend one another in a very dangerous world today.

As you can tell from Gibson’s question, Gov. Palin has simply reiterated the central and foundational element of the NATO Charter. Article 5 of the NATO Charter, to which Gibson and Gov. Palin refer here, “states that an armed attack against one or more of the Allies in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.”. Article 5 is the reason for NATO’s existence, and of course it was originally drafted in 1949 precisely to deal with the situation of a Russian (then Soviet) invasion of the easternmost frontier of NATO, which is precisely what Georgia and/or Ukraine would become if their NATO membership is approved next year.

Funny, isn’t it, how the Left loses interest in multilateralism and treaty obligations when it suits their purpose? No responsible American leader would offer a different answer to Gibson’s question. Any other answer would simply be a declaration of intent to withdraw from NATO.

UPDATE: TPM boss Josh Marshall repeats this line of attack on Gov. Palin, and seems incredulous at the notion that a NATO member might be obligated to go to war if another NATO member is attacked. Seven years ago, NATO invoked Article 5 following the September 11 attacks; it was much noted at the time that this recognized that an attack on the United States was an attack on all NATO members.

How soon they forget.

Tags: , , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • therightguy

    Isn’t Kurtz supposed to make Palin look like Dr. Strangelove? I mean, the lamestream media’s job is to support the democrat nominee, isn’t it? What else is new here? I am starting to get tired of the petty BS. For the majority of us, we know how we’ll vote, so why are we spending so much energy to try to convince people who’ll never vote as we do?
    Jim
    http://www.the-right-guy.com

  • truths

    Since when did that blog and that blogger really matter? Think about it. It’s not surprising that he would be daft enough not to understand the obvious. Which leads me to rule #1 of politics…
    **

    Partisanship makes one stupid.**

    • Dan_McLaughlin

      They are left-wing activists. So, yes, they are more interested in driving bad coverage for Palin than in bothering to understand things like U.S. obligations to our allies.

  • olderthangandalf

    What was a little disconcerting here was her readiness to bring Georgia into NATO without caveat or elaboration of the difficulties involved. There’s been hesitation to do that, and the exact reason has been Article 5 – once they are inside the tent, the obligation does exist for NATO to defend them if they are attacked. There are those who consider Georgia a bridge too far for NATO’s resources.

    It may be that those people are wrong, and that we ought – despite the concerns and resistance of many of our European allies – push to extend NATO to include the Ukraine (has some support) and Georgia (not so much). Multilateral institutions being what they are, we might or might not be successful in efforts to get either of them included.

    The point is, if we add them, as she somewhat glibly says we should, we take on a very deep obligation, and an obligation that right now we would have a hard time honoring successfully. Our power, and NATO’s power, is not unlimited, and fights have to be chosen wisely. It didn’t seem to me that she was on top of all the implications for us and our allies, although the snippet was brief and perhaps not indicative of the depth of her though overall.

    All in all, I was depressed by her comments on the Bush Doctrine and Georgia.

  • Adjoran

    sufficient to list all the things the TPM crew does not understand, of course.

    This is one of them. First of all, NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine is also the position of Obama and Biden, as well as McCain’s. If she is advocating a reckless policy, so are all of them.

    Also, Article V does not require member nations to go to war when one is attacked; rather it authorizes members to “. . . assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”

    So, each country gets to “deem necessary” what actions it may take (up and including “armed force”). Don’t hold your breath waiting for the Belgian Army to come your rescue.

    • MikeO

      There’s this thingy on my wall. When I push upward on it with these things on the end of this other thing that’s attached to this part that comes out of some other part that’s attached to my head, light pours out of a round thing in the ceiling. Either that, or the dark get sucked into it—I’m not sure which.

      Since, in your estimation, everyone else but you (including RedState readers, Governor Palin, and me) are too dense to realize that extending NATO membership to Georgia and Ukraine implies more than say, induction decisions for some club that second-graders cook-up during recess, can you please explain what’s happening with that wall thingy?

  • bobbymike

    The liberal media and dems rely on voter ignorance regardless of the issue.

    Whether it is Social Security, Medicare, taxes or whatever public policy issue.

    Unfortunately independant voters have no idea what Nato article V says. So when everyone screams Palin wants to go to war with Russia the response will be “Oh my God she is dangerously unqualified to be VP”

    • PSDA

      You may have found her answer glib and wished that she’d elaborated or couched her answer more–but isn’t her position on NATO membership for Georgia also McCain’s position?

      I’d have found it more troubling if she’d given an ambivalent or wishy-washy reaction that was odds with the top of the ticket.

      Furthermore, it’s ALSO Obama’s position.

      Sounds like you’re upset that Palin didn’t stake out a position at odds with both her party’s nominees for prez AND the Dem party’s nominee.

  • truths

    am currently in houston with hurrycane fearmongering dominating the news so I am watching it now for the first time.

    gibson is asking some really dumb, pedantic, and offensive, questions (can you look this country in the eye…? have you been anywhere outside the US? have you met a foreign head of state?)

    the tone is, well, pompous on the part of good ol’ charlie. this was a gotcha interview and she seems to be doing well so far.

    • Dan_McLaughlin

      Even though I had to read your comment twice.

      Seriously: Obama and Biden both support Georgia and Ukraine entering NATO. You have to go read Josh Marshall’s update, which says more than you could ever hope to explain about liberals when he explains that it’s OK when Obama and Biden do it because they don’t really mean it.

  • truths

    now the gotcha question on man’s contribution to global cooli..er, warming.

    • MikeO

      After this admission of baldfaced lying to make a point, I have lost the capacity for outrage.

      What clowns like Josh Marshall don’t understand is that alliances are either binding or not worth the paper on which they are printed. According to him, it’s not worth it to go to war over a Russian invasion of Armenia. Ok, so let Russia invade Armenia because they aren’t NATO members. Then what?

      Another thing that these clowns don’t understand is that there is a deep reserve of Americans who came of age when the US and the USSR were locked in a death struggle. Sure, we can poke fun at ourselves over the cold war in popular culture now, but when the photographs of Soviet Russian soldiers rolling through Georgia with their middle fingers out for the cameras hit the internet, I wasn’t the only one whose first thought was, “f—in’ Ivan wants to get himself some.” I haven’t even thought the word, “Ivan,” in almost 20 years!

      I was 17 when I joined the US Army and 22 when I left it the year after the Berlin wall fell and the year before the USSR formally disbanded. In a way, I majored in killing Soviets but never got a chance to put it to good use.

      I keep hearing the specious argument that the US military is overextended. The argument emboldens bullies like Putin who hold misconceptions about us as far afield as al Queda’s, but it ignores the fact that much of our force capacity is being spent on the (IMHO unreasonable) demands of the kid-glove approach taken in Iraq and Afghanistan.

      Just as our prosperity gives us the luxury of suffering the fools of the left and the drag they put on the rest of us without devolving into a shooting civil war, our overwhelming military capabilities allow us the luxury of follies like “regime change” and nation-building with some success, but it costs us in lives, money, and time.

      If the economics suddenly change because of increased commitments, the kid-glove
      approach will be the first thing to go, and the depth of our excess capacity will be frightening.

      • MikeO

        Sorry–It’s JacksonPoorlock.

        My bad.

  • Rod_Patrick

    I give Sarah Palin an A.

    Why? She properly said what are really important in foreign policy… “honest”, rational, and understandable formula. It doesn’t have to be a convoluted and “only-for-genius” stuff like what the Democrats are trying to say. Her answers are pure and bereft of any form of conspiracy theories that the Democrats love so much.

    I agree to the main points raised by a Free Republic blog. Here.

    Sarah pointed out the essential things:

    • “The top priority is to defend the United States of America. I know that John McCain would do that.”
      • “With new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.”
      • “War has got to be a last option.”
      • *”If a strike is imminent we have every right to defend our country…and that’s what a McCain/Palin administration would do.” *
      • “In order to stop Islamic extremists we must do whatever it takes. We must not blink, Charlie.”

    The “We Must Not Blink, Charlie” line reflects her strength of character.

    If the whole interview is dull, that’s not Sarah’s fault. Blame Gibson and his staff for the poor setting.

  • slothrop

    Gibson prefaced the war question with a query as to whether she supports inclusion of Georgia (and Ukraine) into NATO, and she replied in the affirmative to both. It was fair to bring to the fore the specific obligations such inclusion entails.

    Your point is well taken re: those who would impulsively support Georgian inclusion based on a vague pro-international-law stance but would be unwilling to then shoulder the consequences of the decision.

    • streiff

      some of us are depressed at the thought of Russia swallowing up its neighbors while continuing to be Ground Zero of nuclear technology proliferation.

      • kyle8

        And I am not saying that it isn’t, then IMO something else has got to go. Either we withdraw some of our many commitments from other parts of the world, or we DEMAND a vastly greater defense posture from Europe.

        We are dangerously overstretched and our economy is teetering. We have not seen the worst part yet of the housing/financial crises. Afghanistan is going to need more troops in order to stabilize it from a resurgent taliban.

        Yes, wouldn’t it be nice if we were omnipotent. Then we could aid the oppressed peoples everywhere, whether they wanted our help or not. We could confront tyrants everywhere and cow them into submission. Alas our resources are not unlimited, and our people do not have infinite patience for constant warfare.

  • hunter

    Republicans make good alliances that count.
    Ukraine knows that an Obama Presidency means their reconquest by Russia.
    Obama is too busy finding evil in America and figuring what it means that Russia is on the UN Security Council.
    McCain knows that America comes first. Gov. Palin supports him and agrees.
    Obama is not sure just what he is a citizen of, and is still looking for his ‘world citizen’ passport. Biden is still yelling at the guy in the wheelchair to stand up.

  • madtrapper

    The lefty’s have the notion that Russia must be our friend, hey – their a democracy! WRONG!!! They have not been on the level since the days of Lenin. They forgot Putin had a lengthy career in the KGB.

    When the USSR broke up the Libs must assume the communists just disipated like a fart in the wind. Where do they think they went?

    I know where they went, nowhere! They are still there and they still don’t like us, never will.

    The Barry ticket would be a great win for Russia. They know we will reduce our military, surrender to Al Queda, apologize to everyone and cease to be a player in the world economic market.

    Why does the left have to continue pounding this country? Why not go to an area that will embrace them, say, Cuba, China or N. Korea, for instance?

    • olderthangandalf

      What all the politicians support is letting Georgia and Ukraine start on the “Membership Action Plan” process for NATO.

      That’s not membership in NATO. That’s not guaranteed membership someday in NATO. That’s not next year membership in NATO.

      If it happens, and given European opposition I wouldn’t bet on even this happening, it means that at some point way down the road we will be talking about their joining NATO. IIRC, the last folks to go into MAP took about 10 years to get into NATO.

      • streiff

        It is very likely membership next year.

        NATO Foreign Ministers meet in December to decide whether or not to extend an invitation to membership. Right now the odds are heavily in favor of Ukraine receiving such an invitation. Georgia was a shoo-in for full membership in January, until the contretemps with Russia, because they’ve already submitted NATO membership to a referendum and it passed by a huge margin.

        • olderthangandalf

          Since 1999 countries haven’t been invited straight into NATO. They go into the Membership Action Plan phase, and later maybe or maybe not (but probably at some time) get invited into NATO.

          McCain, Bush, Obama, Biden, everyone else has spoken in terms of Georgia and the Ukraine going into MAP.

          Palin talked, perhaps necessarily imprecisely because of the interview format, of membership in NATO (I’m not saying that her not saying anything about MAP necessarily means that she’s not aware of it; given the way the questions flowed it might not have been a set of details she considered worth getting into, or it might have been details she’s not gotten around to figuring out yet. I don’t know.)

          Don’t take my word on MAP being the route which countries must now travel to get into NATO.

          http://www.nato.int/issues/map/index.html

          • MikeO

            Are you saying that President Bush and the three senators on the two major presidential tickets this year are in support of putting Georgia and Ukraine on the path to NATO membership but do not support actual membership for either country?