CATO institute writers Benjamin H. Friedman and Justin Logan have issued a common sense plea to knock of all the NATO shenanigans about Ukraine and Georgia. The Ball Gunner has already tackled why severing Ukraine from Russia is about as likely as the dreaded Iranian invasion of the U.S. we’re told to worry about so much. Both the sitting dope, and the two dopes currently running, are all about extending the NATO road to Ukraine - and all those damned Ukrainians, 63 percent of which don’t want to join NATO, can just shut their traps.

As for Georgia, we’re clearly in lunatic territory now. Russia or no Russia, the Caucasus nations’ borders have always been more or less a form of interpretive dance. As in, I’m going to dance over here with some guns and then the border goes this way. John McCain, George Bush and Barack Obama all support wrapping Georgia up in the NATO blanket. This despite the fact that Mikheil Saakashvili is a close contender for best tin-pot thug of 2007, after he called in the police to dispatch anti-government protests and shut down opposition TV station IMEDI. So even if you get past the point of allowing an unstable nation into NATO, you still have the rather prickly problem that:

• Saakashvili started a war
• Russia countered
• If Georgia was a NATO nation then the U.S. and western Europe would have been REQUIRED to assist them

That’s kind of the point people seem to miss, once you’re a NATO nation the gist of the matter is that you don’t have to do this stuff alone any more. If Georgia had been a NATO member back in August then the U.S. would be fighting a third war, and a much worse war, and very likely a world war, this very moment. It’s true that the Russian military at this point isn’t all it pretends to be, but there are long lines of bones from Moscow to Paris and then Volgagrad (was Stalingrad) to Berlin. Being that neither George Bush, nor Barack Obama, nor John McCain would be doing the freezing amid General Winter and General Mud I suppose these things are of little consequence to them.

Opening up NATO to these two, not entirely stable, nations is asking for nothing but trouble. Of course, its total exposure as a poor idea undoubtedly means it will be pursued with gusto. Like William Lind, I occasionally wish we had only one monarch for several decades, there would be a greater chance of talking sense into them.

On a humerous note that will fly over the heads of most, Russia apparently thinks the U.S. really should stay in Iraq a bit longer.

From other fronts:

The looming disaster in the Pakistan-Afghanistan region rapidly is decending into a comedy of errors. The lack of a unified strategy means a hodge-podge of actions that only push forward in one area by pushing back in another. But the combined might of Generals Larry, Curly and Moe have decided that arming the tribal militias in Pakistan (free registration required) is the solution du jure. While this is billed as a Pakistani solution, the reality is that this is likely a U.S. solution handed to the Pakistanis.

First, if the problem in the area is a LACK OF ACCESS to weapons then I’ve apparently been reading the wrong news.
Second, the reason this resoundingly fails the smell test is the desperate attempt to brand this as “Surge: Part Deux - Surge Harder” or whatever. Even the military has proclaimed the obvious, that attempting a surge type strategy in Afghanistan would be well beyond worthless. Iraqis, despite their religious divide and total willingness to kill the ever loving crap out of each other, DO have a common identity as Iraqis, with a shared language, common ethnicity, common lineage and the like. Afghans, on the other hand, don’t really havy any of that stuff. What they’ve got instead is a mash of Pashtuns, Tajiks, Uzbeks and half dozen smaller groups each trying to chisel out a small corner of the mountains and valleys to kick back with their wives and enjoy all the benefits the 18th century has to offer. Handing out weapons to the Pashtun in Pakistan is essentially the same as handing out weapons to the Pashtun in Afghanistan, and when the Pashtun in Afghanistan are not fighting foreigners they are quite content to spend their time fighting the Uzbeks and Tajiks. Just maybe the Uzbeks and Tajiks will resent being shot at by weapons provided by the U.S. / Pakistan. At least, I would.

But we’ve still got nothing but noise coming from the sound box in Washington. (from the Wa-Po article)

“There is a significant, but not a comprehensive, bump up in the security element,” one official said. While there are more soldiers on the ground, he said, the military strategy is not sustainable because Pakistan “is still doing virtually nothing about extending the government’s political authority into the tribal areas, and virtually nothing about economic development” in the region.

Of course they are “doing virtually nothing about extending government’s political authority into the tribal areas” you bleeding wanker! There has never been “political authority” in the tribal areas outside the tribes - get it, Gus? NEVER-NEVER-NEVER-NEVER-NEVER!!!!!!

Meanwhile, As Hamid Karzai and the Afghan state slide ever closer to the chasm of illegitimacy and irrelevance, NATO has stumbled upon the perfect solution - just pick some other poor schmoe to lead Afghanistan. Of course, the Afghans have plans of their own when it comes to governance. After being ingloriously runoff by the Northern Alliance, the Taliban are resurfacing as the de facto government in many regions.

As William Lind has noted, cutting a deal with the Taliban that returns them to power with the promise of keeping out Al Qaeda might be the best hope for Afghanistan.

Here’s hoping that the new silverback in the Oval Office is paying attention.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.