The future of NATO

Yesterday, Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili was interviewed by the BBC about the current situation in Georgia. At one point, he said that the current situation is no longer about Georgia but rather about the future of NATO. I think he's right. Indeed, perhaps the situation in Georgia was always about the future of NATO.

NATO has been searching for a raison d'etre ever since the fall of the Berlin wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Last month, NATO hired a former Coca Cola executive to retool its brand and revamp its image. The question is, of course, what the purpose of a military defense alliance is in a world in which there are no existential military threats.

Placed against this backdrop, the recent developments in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus suddenly take on a different light. Although not necessary and known to antagonize Russia, NATO insists on building a missile defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. Although not necessary and known to antagonize Russia, Georgia launches a military attack on South Ossetia. Suddenly, we are told that the Ukraine and Georgia must be admitted to NATO to ward of imminent Russian military aggression. Implicitly and expressly, we are told that unless we act now, the Russians will dominate "us" in the near future.

Really? Thus far, Russia has acted quite predictably when it seized the opportunity presented by Saakashvili's reckless decision to launch a military attack on Ossetia, shooting down Russian military planes and killing Russian peacekeepers in the process. No rational leader of a small country would have decided to attack the Russian army unprovoked without some assurances that he would receive help. (Perhaps he and the Russians were played?). A simple thought experiment shows why the Russian response was utterly predictable. Imagine Iran launching a military attack to secure its control over the Shatt al-Arab waterway bordering Iraq, shooting down US military planes and killing US soldiers. Now imagine what the US would do...

This is not to say that Russia should not be held to its agreement to withdraw under the Georgian peace deal, and its intent to maintain a continued military presence inside Georgia must be rejected. In the meantime, Europeans should ask themselves what is to be gained by a new cold war with Russia. The purpose and future of NATO directly depend on the answer.