Sekėjai

Ieškoti šiame dienoraštyje

2023 m. birželio 30 d., penktadienis

Nam nato ili ne nato? (The rest of the text is in English)

"In 2008 America was the champion of nato enlargement, pushing for Ukraine to be admitted to the "membership action plan" (map), an antechamber to full accession. France and Germany resisted, worried about antagonising Russia. The alliance awkwardly promised that Ukraine and Georgia "will become members of nato" but did nothing to enact the pledge. Today the roles are reversed. France wants a clear "path towards membership" and America resists making firm commitments. (Germany has been reluctant throughout, hiding behind France in 2008 and America now.)

Why the change of heart? Because in 2008, says Ivo Daalder, a former American ambassador to nato, the idea of war between nato and Russia seemed "preposterous"; today it does not. If Article 5 is to mean anything, he argues, admitting Ukraine would be tantamount to nato promising to fight at its side. That is something Mr Biden has avoided, fearing nuclear escalation and even a third world war. These are not idle concerns, particularly given Russia's threats and its decision to deploy tactical nukes to Belarus." [1]

Why do the impoverished Baltic countries, Poland and, under the banker Macron's rule, divided France so easily pursue Ukraine's membership in NATO with the huge risk of a global nuclear war? Aren't such stupid "allies" a danger to the survival of America itself?

1. "NATO is agonising over whether to let Ukraine join." The Economist, 24 June 2023, p. NA.

Komentarų nėra: