Having the right allies and denying those to rivals was and is always essential in national security policy - this fact is true since some thousand years.
The NATO members did a fine job in this, but the world sees new nations on the rise to power - predictably serious power.
China and India are on the rise.
China is obviously too different politically to become an ally before the communists (which are in fact nationalists) lose power.
India otherwise has some ties to the NATO member UK and other Western Nations through the Commonwealth.
India and China have a regional rivalry including slightly disputed borders - I don't expect them to ally unless they get threatened by the same power.
Finally there's Russia. Russia is relevant because of its decent population size, extreme geographical size, decent industrial and technological level, good education, nuclear weapons, its believe to be a great power (at least) and because of its natural riches. It might ally with China and India and it co-operates with both, but seems to have troubles rather with China than with India.
In other words: It's mating season in foreign policy.
We seem to ignore that there hasn't been much visible in terms of alliance or friendship building (except some US-Indian activity).
India and China are natural rivals and far, far away (which still means something as long as you dominate in naval power) - Russia would be the natural ally for the Europeans.
Having Russia as an ally (even if the alliance would be restricted to European geography) would eliminate the only serious potential threat to European security (the Arabs - even if united - lack the industrial base to seriously threaten us with conventional forces).
A limited NATO membership or a WEU membership of Russia would not only pull the only really serious opponent on our team - it would also keep Russian politics the freedom it wants to have in Asian affairs.
Sven Ortmann
The NATO members did a fine job in this, but the world sees new nations on the rise to power - predictably serious power.
China and India are on the rise.
China is obviously too different politically to become an ally before the communists (which are in fact nationalists) lose power.
India otherwise has some ties to the NATO member UK and other Western Nations through the Commonwealth.
India and China have a regional rivalry including slightly disputed borders - I don't expect them to ally unless they get threatened by the same power.
Finally there's Russia. Russia is relevant because of its decent population size, extreme geographical size, decent industrial and technological level, good education, nuclear weapons, its believe to be a great power (at least) and because of its natural riches. It might ally with China and India and it co-operates with both, but seems to have troubles rather with China than with India.
In other words: It's mating season in foreign policy.
We seem to ignore that there hasn't been much visible in terms of alliance or friendship building (except some US-Indian activity).
India and China are natural rivals and far, far away (which still means something as long as you dominate in naval power) - Russia would be the natural ally for the Europeans.
Having Russia as an ally (even if the alliance would be restricted to European geography) would eliminate the only serious potential threat to European security (the Arabs - even if united - lack the industrial base to seriously threaten us with conventional forces).
A limited NATO membership or a WEU membership of Russia would not only pull the only really serious opponent on our team - it would also keep Russian politics the freedom it wants to have in Asian affairs.
WEU Brussels treaty article V: (my emphasis)
If any of the High Contracting Parties should be the object of an armed attack in Europe, the other High Contracting Parties will, in accordance with the provisions of Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, afford the Party so attacked all the military and other aid and assistance in their power.
Sven Ortmann
No comments:
Post a Comment