Results of the NATO summit, where Georgia and Ukraine refused the action plan on joining the alliance, promising in the abstract, that one day they will become members of NATO, recalled that lies at the base of the organization. NATO membership is a great testimony of democratic standards, and a symbol of joining the Euro-Atlantic civilization and many other beautiful and useful things, which, however, the Alliance shares with several other, more pochetaemyh organizations, for example, with the same European Union. But there is one crucial difference — only NATO, Article 5 of its status, forcing each of the participating countries to consider an attack on all of them as an attack on all, in other words the debt in case of an attack on all of NATO states to breathe for her.
And resolute refusal of Germany and France will allow Georgia and Ukraine to get at least the previous Action Plan, go a step on the way to the alliance means for my eyes, very ordinary thing — Berlin and Paris in the end is not ready to breathe in Kiev and Tbilisi.
At first glance it seems paradoxical that NATO can survive for 59 years, based on the principle of the charter, whereby all decisions are taken by consensus of the alliance. Yes, some organization in the world may well exist and to act? Circumstances, why NATO is in such an unusual principle still functioned, there were two — in-1’s, a common understanding of the member countries the dangers they carried the Communist empire, and another exceptional role played by the alliance of his favorite — the United States. All members of the alliance as well as the aggressor patentsyytsny understood that specifically U.S. power in including and nuclear, makes an attack on Europe business with uncertain chances. Not whether the United States — and Europe would be defenseless before hitting Russian divisions. Because the United States and NATO could conduct part of its decisions — because again as part of NATO was a form of South American security umbrella for Europe, America was a donor safety, Europe — the recipient. Rough, but simple.
The collapse of communism and the disintegration of the Soviet Union changed the first factor and worked on the perception of another.
According to the views of so many post-communist Our homeland, even the current Putin does not constitute such an absolute and real danger, which was the Soviet Union. Razladivsya first component — the general awareness of the dangers and monotonous. And this, in turn, impacted on the other — if there is no danger from which ultimately only the United States can protect, that is why they always word must NATO decisive?
And "old" Europe felt right and the taste for their own decisions. With all this, it seems, was crucial not only Moscow’s position as an idea of "old" Europe of the civilizational boundaries. If several years ago NATO perceived Baltic countries, Poland and even earlier, the Kremlin was this, too, to put it mildly, not in ecstasy. But then neither Paris nor Berlin did not believe that reasons of Moscow though the extent to which you need to take into consideration. Not considered because they were convinced that it — Europe is an investment, and the indivisibility of security in Europe apply to them. But Ukraine and Georgia — well, do not know, do not know …
Many became fiercely condemn Berlin and Paris, remember Munich 1938. But it’s worth asking — support the American position meant many NATO members their courageous willingness to breathe in Kiev?
Apart from the question of Georgia and Ukraine, Bucharest summit reviewed the progress of the NATO operation in Afghanistan. Seems different questions, but essentially one issue and the discussion of the second almost all they say about first.
It will be recalled that on Afghanistan, NATO for the first time in its own history has applied Article 5 of the said statute, described the terrorist attack on America in 2001 year as an attack on all NATO members. Well, how about a readiness to breathe in Kabul? Yes, for simplicity is not very bright and showed that the summit in Bucharest. Great achievement of the summit — French President Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s Napoleonic Army stateliness and persistent fighter First Global solemnly committed to the war in Afghanistan, one (!) Battalion soldier. Well, not even the war, the French go to the east of Afghanistan, and to the south, on the front in the war against the Taliban will go the same ones who always — Americans.
Well at least someone Sarkozy sent. A lot of soldier sent to Afghanistan the countries that supported the Bucharest action plans for Georgia and Ukraine? And, they are politically support the operation of their fighters are there symbolically. And the Taliban and alkaydavtsav these moral gestures do not work, they shoot, blow up and kill. And to destroy them, you need more than a fighter. Rough, but simple.
So maybe about Ukraine and Georgia laudatory position of many NATO states means the same thing: we accept them, and in which case breathe in Kiev and Tbilisi will … Well of course who are the same, and who is always.
Here, by the way, it should be recalled that one of the first steps of "orange" Triumphers 2004 was the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from Iraq. For operations in Iraq can be treated differently, but the South American government believes its concept, worthy of being his fighters were killed in Baghdad. With all this at the moment far not only South American government thinks that if the Americans at the moment will come from Iraq, the consequences will be great for world security.
Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko brought Ukrainian troops from Iraq, saying that Ukrainians are not ready to die for Baghdad. Excellent, but now seek security guarantees from the Yankees? Ukrainians are not ready for Baghdad, and the Americans have in Kiev? Yes, are they arranged?
On the way, this has been a debate still first creation of NATO — the fact that the U.S. is the ultimate safe, psychologically transformed into confidence that they — the only guarantee of safety: they pick, though waging war, let them pay for this leadership.
Unfortunately, the combination of the Bucharest summit theme of Georgia and Ukraine to the theme of Afghanistan showed that warnings almost 60 years ago were completely unfounded.
Tags: Ukraine, NATO, georgia