Article

2008-09-18 Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia

NATO chief: Road to membership ''wide open'' for Georgia

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2008-09-18 00:00|| || Front Page|| [2 views ] Top

#1 MOUD + IRAN is weighing in and warning NATO agz interference in GEORGIA and the CAUCASUS.

HMMMMM, personally I'm reading MOUD's WARNING as more to RUSSIA, NOT TO NATO???

Posted by JosephMendiola 2008-09-18 01:12|| 2008-09-18 01:12|| Front Page Top

#2 If I were a Georgian, I wouldn't get my hopes up. NATO is a largely ineffective force against Russia and Russia knows it it. In a stand off, it will be a repeat of historical confrontations. Not good for Georgia. Still, what other cards do they have to play?

Posted by Richard of Oregon 2008-09-18 04:42|| 2008-09-18 04:42|| Front Page Top

#3 Rember Poland in 1939? The allies gaved her a guarantee (despite Poland having taken part in the rape of Czachoslowakia) that because of geography they couldn't enforce. This was juts enticing Hitler to call the bluff.

Now, look where is Georgia.

Nato could/should accept Ukraine and evoid touching Georgia with a ten foot pole.

Posted by JFM">JFM 2008-09-18 10:31|| 2008-09-18 10:31|| Front Page Top

#4 If I have to agree with a Frenchman, at least it's JFM. This is dumb, whether we follow through or not.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-09-18 10:39|| 2008-09-18 10:39|| Front Page Top

#5 Looks as though russia can't really afford to swing their d*ck around very much since their economy is in the crapper.

Posted by bigjim-ky 2008-09-18 11:38|| 2008-09-18 11:38|| Front Page Top

#6 REDDIT BREAKING > SECRETARY OF DEFENSE GATES WARNS THAT ONCE GEORGIA JOINS NATO, ANY SECOND RUSSIAN ATTACK AGZ IT WILL BE MET BY AMERICAN ARMED RESPONSE, as per NATO Charter.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2008-09-18 22:54|| 2008-09-18 22:54|| Front Page Top

#7 Just forget about Georgia already. Let it go, do not fight it . . . . Slow withering is what awaits poor Georgia.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-09-18 23:01|| 2008-09-18 23:01|| Front Page Top

#8 The deal for Georgia entering NATO is not primarily for the US - we may be useful in appearing to lead, but it's real a decision for Turkey, Armenia and the Azeris to make. Curiously, and barely reported, the ice seems to be breaking that way - vis the Turk PM's recent football visit to Yerevan, and renewed Armenian/Azeri talks.

A lot is probably going on behind the scenes, but a lot more probably has to be done, but if Georgia can gain any strategic depth, it could fit into NATO with Turkey's backstopping.

The $$$$$ to do this come from the oil/gas transit fees from the Caspian - and there should be enough to cover everyone, even if Russia tries everything short of war to stop it.

The less the US says anything about this, the more likely it's happening, particularly if nothing is said in the upcoming debates or in any detail on the sunday talkies.

Still doubtful, but whoda thunkit 25 years ago.

Posted by Halliburton - Asymmetrical Reply Division 2008-09-18 23:11|| 2008-09-18 23:11|| Front Page Top

#9 "Turkey, Armenia and the Azeris to make."

Armenia is generally pro-Russian; also somewhat anti-Turkish (b/c of allegations of genocide way back when 1915?).

Posted by General_Comment 2008-09-18 23:18|| 2008-09-18 23:18|| Front Page Top

#10 The deal for Georgia entering NATO is not primarily for the US

Well, if U.S. were to mind its own security within or close to its borders, or at least in the western hemisphere, we would not have all these problems, would we?

Posted by General_Comment 2008-09-18 23:20|| 2008-09-18 23:20|| Front Page Top

#11 Yes, why should we care that terrorists trained halfway round in a barbarian wasteland to fly airplanes into our skyscrapers? Or that countries which spent their own citizens and tax funds to help us put an end to terror aimed at the world are under attack for it?

On the other hand, jihadi terrorists have crossed our borders from Canada and Mexico. Perhaps we should take care of those nearby problems instead.

Posted by trailing wife ">trailing wife 2008-09-18 23:28|| 2008-09-18 23:28|| Front Page Top

#12 "terrorists trained halfway round in a barbarian wasteland to fly airplanes into our skyscrapers?"

TW, you've got to be joking! Let's start with the "terrorists": that would be 19 citizens of South Arabia - a U.S. ally in the Middle East. Next, "barbarian wasteland" - that would be Iraq and Iran - the cradle of the human civilization, and the inventors of the arabic numerals: 1, 2, 3 etc. Finally, where is that evidence that Iraq ever trained those 19 South Arabians or any other terrorists???

Posted by General_Comment 2008-09-18 23:36|| 2008-09-18 23:36|| Front Page Top

#13 GC - your first comment is on target, particularly since Russia retains substantial combat forces in Armenia - that alone makes the change scenario very unlikely, and is simply the current proof of the historic lineup of the region.

All that said though, if Turkey leads, particularly if Iraq and the Kurds are remotely calm, it could happen.

Armenia is clearly its own nation now, and in a position to make a deal for itself.

Still doubtful, but it could happen.

As for the remaining comments, we could keep our interest commercial (i.e. energy related) but still have the security interests TW notes. None of these nations are quite the non-sovereign areas as the FATA/pre-war Afghanistan, but they all have issues.

Posted by Halliburton - Asymmetrical Reply Division 2008-09-18 23:45|| 2008-09-18 23:45|| Front Page Top

#14 With respect to Canada and Mexico: U.S. already did a good job there by improving border security.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-09-18 23:50|| 2008-09-18 23:50|| Front Page Top

#15 "but still have the security interests TW notes"

A: Security interests are just that security interests. Instead U.S. wants: (i) NATO expansion, (ii) Missile Defense in every bordering state, and (iii) station its own troops there.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-09-18 23:52|| 2008-09-18 23:52|| Front Page Top