tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post5908956510391334872..comments2024-03-27T20:37:08.065+01:00Comments on Defence and Freedom: Leaving NATO?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-80035733132960237752019-02-22T09:50:25.390+01:002019-02-22T09:50:25.390+01:00I think my line of thought here wouldn't be un...I think my line of thought here wouldn't be uncommon by the time when a NATO great power has become solidly fascist. It just looks unusual now. The security architecture of NATO can and would be changed with additional elements, so there's little point in looking at this in a ceteris paribus style (for once).S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-6353786114095055102019-02-18T18:49:09.658+01:002019-02-18T18:49:09.658+01:00S O
I'm not following you here.
Are you su...S O <br /><br />I'm not following you here. <br /><br />Are you suggesting your idea would work if NATO failed? What if your ideas concerning the EU are wrong. What if it fractures into national self interest? How would that effect a German course of action?<br /><br />How much risk would Germany be taking to gamble that you are correct. To me the history of Europe suggests a different ending than yours. I see Eastern European countries such as Poland seeing neutral Germany as a vassal state of Russia. <br /><br />I already see France moving to take the U.S. leadership position in Europe. At this point I don't see Germany, no matter what it decides to do, being surrounded by friendly countries. They might not be enemies now but history shows how that can change in a short time.<br /><br />In my opinion your course of action will make Germany into a problem for all of Europe. onegunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12311158898960800643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-30826871553490181562016-11-16T19:12:16.351+01:002016-11-16T19:12:16.351+01:00There is now Czech draft constitutional law in the...There is now Czech draft constitutional law in the pipeline - concerning referendum about leaving NATO, via article 13. <br /><br />Sponsors are communists MPs, including their only one so called "reformist" and including one policeman of old regime, which in 1989 beated demonstrants.<br /><br />http://www.psp.cz/doc/00/11/02/00110224.pdf (in Czech) Karelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15236107941843936832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-83386211690401358162016-11-11T14:35:18.687+01:002016-11-11T14:35:18.687+01:00There's actually a post on ceasefires in the p...There's actually a post on ceasefires in the pipeline, it'll cover this anyway.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-58027171494924444182016-11-11T07:59:02.002+01:002016-11-11T07:59:02.002+01:00Sven, it certainly confirms nothing like that. Mos...Sven, it certainly confirms nothing like that. Most of the time, Russian so called ceasefire confirms the importance to give Western leaders some bait, some opportunity to "do something about that in comedy for domestic voters", or to have some kind of operational pause and opportunity to concentrate forces for attack, like before the Ilovaysk operation. <br /><br />Business logic idealized by theory of rational actor is basically for people trying to convince you that they are honest in some fair deal. There is completely different logic in the street gang culture extended to state level. <br /><br />If I am a gangster and can succesfully cheat you or bully you once, it means for me that you are fool or chicken and I can do that again and again. In the business model of companies like Schicklgruber & Dzhugashvili it is only your fault.<br /><br />Even in domestic policy, theory of rational actor is really bad predictor, if you do mostly with authoritarian personalities dependent on some Ersatzvaterfigur. <br /><br />For example Czech president lies almost on everyday basis, four courts convinced him as liar. But in the end, it really dosn`t matter - about 2/3 of Czechs generally trust him because of his völkisch rhetoric. <br /> <br /><br />Karelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15236107941843936832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-3027608461240661672016-11-11T04:45:37.555+01:002016-11-11T04:45:37.555+01:00The thing about the ceasefires is more complicated...The thing about the ceasefires is more complicated. Most ceasefires are rackets, and in fact the Russian acceptance of ceasefires confirms the importance of reputation - it's just not about the Russian reputation among Ukrainians.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-43092219890743368692016-11-11T02:14:44.466+01:002016-11-11T02:14:44.466+01:00Yes, game theory. It`s theory. And it needs empiri...Yes, game theory. It`s theory. And it needs empirical tests.<br /><br />Every Ukrainian or Syrian "ceasefire agreement" with Russia goes to hell in just few hours. But Kerry - and even worse, much more conciliatory Herr Steinmeier - everytime goes to Moscow to exemplify Einsteins definition of madness (repeat the same procedure and expect different results). <br /><br />It seems to me that this specific game theory thesis keeps to be falsified every few months. It`s just as abstract as theory of state, IMO. But almost every man lives in state; that`s an imagination, which is real at least in its consequences. Everybody`s acting as if state is tangible reality. <br /><br />On the other side, very unsuccessful American bussinessman without reputation was just elected to WH. Karelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15236107941843936832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-862309882937731062016-11-10T02:13:52.965+01:002016-11-10T02:13:52.965+01:00Well, even states are mere imaginations, and so is...Well, even states are mere imaginations, and so is the power of treaties.<br /><br />But there's tit for tat, and game theory doesn't exactly propose that a treaty member that knows about his partner's disrespect for the treaty should keep respecting the same. Nor does it propose to conclude new treaties with said partner. In fact, it's not so much the legal enforcement by agents of the law but the reputation that makes contracts useful. Break a contract - your contract partner will tell others and they won't do business with you without additional effort on your part (securities).<br /><br />That Article 42 in the Treaty of the EU may become powerful if more people know about it and learn to respect it - but that requires that those who know it disseminate this knowledge.<br />Article 1 of North Atlantic Treaty is largely unknown and not followed - but it sure is satisfying for short moments to counter American demands that Europeans meet imaginary obligations with a demand that Americans (and British, French, Polish) meet their actual obligations.<br /><br />I proposed that we Europeans need a forum and discussion on defence without much American involvement to keep out the American perspective that drowns any other one. This is one such issue; just about every American with whom I talked about the issue thinks that we don't live up to our mil spending obligations though actually none such exist. meanwhile, they're oblivious to the fact that they don't live up to their obligation to be nonconfrontational.<br /><br />I'm pushing against a torrent, but this at least passes the Kant's Imperative test.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-37468246963907737222016-11-10T00:38:17.676+01:002016-11-10T00:38:17.676+01:00Controversial German law theorist Carl Schmitt mad...Controversial German law theorist Carl Schmitt made key distinction between state`s law and international law - back in sixtees. <br /><br />If there is no global hegemon in international system ("great power space") as an enforcer, then all what`s left is some vague "customary law" inter pares, Schmitt wrote. (Sovereigns beeing in "natural state" between themselves...)<br /><br />"Rest of the West" - unlike Schmitt - can see project of liberal democratic international order (with Trump victory it`s just exploding on global level) as more than mere "disguise of American world hegemony" - and certainly we wanted to see and do it that way. But there is still the point to the aforementioned argument.<br /><br />International law, alliances included, always need enforcer(s) - legit or not, that`s different question. That`s why only (not so) smart power, soft power, non-enforcing Obama lost his "reset" with Russia badly. And also his "legacy" Iran JCPOA will go down soon, Trump or not. Revisionist powers don`t want rule-based international order. Just power-based. <br /><br />Sometimes alliance written on paper exist just on that paper only, as for example Czechs really should know - after Munich Agreement in 1938 and after August 1968 "friendly" invasion. <br /><br />I studied Polish documents written by office of former president Kaczyński (who was probably assasinated in Smolensk - otherwise Moscow would give plane remains to Warsaw long ago, and today we just learned about traces of TNT in wreck...) for defense policy back in 2008. There was much distrust to NATO integrity even in these old days. <br /><br />There was collapsing European trust horizon even in 2008. <br /><br />So lets face it: There will be no rule-based international order in "illiberal" Europe if relatively decent potentially hegemonic Germany (in Western and Central Europe at least) chooses to stay "neutral". Russia and China sense power vacuum in Europe and they are pushing hard.<br /><br />If Le Pen stays in opposition, German partnership with France is certainly possible. <br /><br />I personally don`t like for example Merkels Greek policy, but again: You may enforce good rules, legit or not - or bad rules. You can do it smart, or not so smart. - Or you can choose to don`t enforce at all and be object of unscrupulous policy of other powers, as Obama did. <br /><br />And if this is the case, R.I.P. "free international trade in Europe", R.I.P. EU project. We will see full-scale protectionist and nationalist revival. Karelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15236107941843936832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-69520850526490048522016-11-09T19:08:13.557+01:002016-11-09T19:08:13.557+01:00Well, Americans are great at complaining about how...Well, Americans are great at complaining about how other nations don't meet entirely fictitious obligations. I suppose it's perfectly legit when I complain about actual, signed and ratified obligations not being met.<br /><br />The fact that such obligations are routinely disregarded is the point, not a reason to not make the point.<br /><br />Similarly, I think a "mündige Bürger" (~competent citizen) should at least be aware of us having actually two alliance treaties in force, and so should foreigners with much interest in military affairs.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-50543215435535829022016-11-09T18:28:07.937+01:002016-11-09T18:28:07.937+01:00"I'm used to the rule of law" does n..."I'm used to the rule of law" does not apply to interstate relationships, only within a state. States are focused on interests. It is a bias to believe that the rule of law can be applied to interstate relationships and that any contract is binding. Laws are open to powerplay as long as there is no enforcing authority or aligned interest of having reliable interactions. German history shows contracts and treason during two world wars...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-65307614308898249742016-11-09T15:13:58.306+01:002016-11-09T15:13:58.306+01:00What bias?
I'm used to the rule of law, in whi...What bias?<br />I'm used to the rule of law, in which the text of contracts has much meaning, and thus also the text of treaties. I'm also used to freedom of speech. Hence I feel free to accuse those who are unreliable of unreliability.<br /><br />The March 2010 post on the EU Vertrag's alliance article doesn't exactly claim that most people consider the EU to be an alliance.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-77557759507076062082016-11-09T09:50:55.723+01:002016-11-09T09:50:55.723+01:00Germany is a small country. Neutrality means oppos...Germany is a small country. Neutrality means opposition to a major fascist power and would require a Swiss to Israel like militarization of society. Despite the contract, I doubt the EU is being considered as such a treaty by people in its member states. This would allow for violations of the defense agreement included in the treaty. NATO is a defense agreement, because people make it, not because of what is written. I think you have a systemic bias, believing in the letters of contracts in foreign politics. Take a Chinese point of view: "A contract is a good starting point for negotiations." The refugee crisis showed the fault lines in Europe quite clearly and I do not expect a defense emergency without US support to play out differently above national level. Finland made it through WWII as a democracy, so there were options, even back then. Germany has no maritime access to sea lines of communication secured by a naval presence to play opposition. It will be forced to align sooner or later, because it is a central part of the banana region. Currently, the US, UK and Poland drift in the same direction together towards Russia and we better have a working agreement with all of them. Morality on a high horse would get Germany eliminated in case of widespread neo-fascism going on wars. This is no country with the military strength to make such choices, all that is possible is to preserve their own way of getting things done. There are no significant democratic allies left if the US stops being a democracy. So democracy once again in history is replaced by different systems, expect for possible tiny pockets that realize the distribution of power and survive.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-81256045716911947392016-11-09T05:09:33.119+01:002016-11-09T05:09:33.119+01:00Comment -1.
Trumpistan is in the making. Big pro...Comment -1. <br /><br />Trumpistan is in the making. Big pro-Trump party about to start in Moscows bar (by ABC Moscow correspondent Patrick Reevell.) <br /><br />Anonymous commenter got it right. Karelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15236107941843936832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-37477467937369564712016-11-08T17:25:38.405+01:002016-11-08T17:25:38.405+01:00The ultimate authority on the meaning of words is ...The ultimate authority on the meaning of words is the author's.<br />Do your own<br />' "defence and freedom" AND fascism '<br />google search if you like. It appears the last time I used this word in 2007 - in a rant about inflationary use of words; I clearly don't use it lightly.<br /><br />http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/american-authoritarianism-under-donald-trump/495263/<br /><br />http://www.salon.com/2016/03/11/trumps_not_hitler_hes_mussolini_how_gop_anti_intellectualism_created_a_modern_fascist_movement_in_america/<br />S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-33865766150098434052016-11-08T11:49:07.080+01:002016-11-08T11:49:07.080+01:00The main purpose of NATO is to provide stability i...The main purpose of NATO is to provide stability in Europe. The EU has a similar but only civilian role, as IRL EU is not a collective defence agreement, no matter what was written down is some long-forgotten document (Brussels excels in writing statements with little resemblence to reality).<br /><br />If NATO ceased to exist, smaller Eastern European countries would be easy meal for Russia to subjugate and oppress. Germany may or may not be too much for Russia to take on directly, but instead of democratic allies Germany would face basket case dictatorships to the east. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-61885218575194378582016-11-08T11:17:32.869+01:002016-11-08T11:17:32.869+01:00Where "fascism" conveniently means "...Where "fascism" conveniently means "whoever opposes our current political goals".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-7079164298901008832016-11-08T02:08:30.307+01:002016-11-08T02:08:30.307+01:00Who would turn fascist - the U.S? You watch too m...Who would turn fascist - the U.S? You watch too much Maher, Daily Show Colbert. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com