NATO bares its toothless gums 4

Charles Krauthammer writes:

Read the first five paragraphs of the NATO statement on the Russian invasion of Georgia and you will find not a hint of who invaded whom. The statement is almost comically evenhanded. "We deplore all loss of life," it declared, as if deploring a bus accident. And, it "expressed its grave concern over the situation in Georgia." Situation, mind you.

It’s not until paragraph six that NATO, a 26-nation alliance with 900 million people and nearly half of world GDP, unsheathes its mighty sword, boldly declaring "Russian military action" – not aggression, not invasion, not even incursion, but "action" – to be "inconsistent with its peacekeeping role."

Having launched a fearsome tautology Moscow’s way, what further action does the Greatest Alliance Of All Time take? Cancels the next NATO-Russia Council meeting.

That’s it. No dissolution of the G-8. No blocking of Russian entry to the World Trade Organization. No suspension of participation in the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics (15 miles from the Georgian border). No statement of support for the Saakashvili government.

Read the rest of this important article here.

 

Posted under Commentary by Jillian Becker on Thursday, August 21, 2008

Tagged with , , ,

This post has 4 comments.

Permalink
  • In Afghanistan arbeitet ohne Bares kein Amt und mit etwas Schmiergeld kann ich wen auch immer aus dem Gefängnis holen.” Hossain aus Herat mag es, dass die Deutschen an roten Ampeln warten auch wenn kein Auto kommt. “Wer Regeln im Kleinen achtet, …

    • Jillian Becker

      So are you saying that you prefer a regime where bribery can get you out of prison to an over-punctilious German-type bureaucracy?

      And how do you relate either to the article? Or are you commenting on Janus’s reminder that all NATO decisions must be unanimous?

  • Jillian Becker

    Thank you, Janus, for your interesting information and apt comment.

  • NATO doesn’t decide things by majority vote — all decisions made by the body must be unanimous. This basically means that it’s next to impossible to get anything useful out of the alliance when it is not directly threatened. Without both American leadership and a direct attack on a member state (which allows forces to be mobilized without a vote), NATO is basically worthless.