New Nato Expansion Thoughts and Opinions?

[wholagun]

Nato sets date for big expansion

By Oana Lungescu
BBC correspondent in Brussels



Nato's eastward expansion continues to irritate Russia
Nato has confirmed it will formally admit seven more countries, all from the former communist bloc, on 2 April.
The nations' flags will be raised next to those of the 19 existing members at a foreign ministers' meeting in Brussels, a spokesman told the BBC.

They are Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.

This is the biggest expansion in the history of Nato, which was created in 1949 to defend Western Europe against the Soviet Union.

Nato will admit the seven new members one month before the European Union includes 10 more countries.

Over a decade since the collapse of the Berlin Wall, most of the former communist nations will become members of the two big Western clubs this spring - except Romania and Bulgaria, which won't join the EU for another three years.

US lead

The official ceremony will take place at Nato headquarters in just over a month's time, attended by all 26 foreign ministers.

The ministers will then prepare the ground for a Nato summit at Istanbul in June, where alliance leaders will try to boost Nato's role in Afghanistan and prepare to hand over to the EU a long-standing mission in Bosnia.

It is a sign of how much both organisations have changed since the end of the Cold War and the beginning of the war on terror.

Nato's eastwards expansion has been spearheaded by the United States, which received strong support from the former communist nations in the wake of the 11 September attacks.

The new Nato members provided air bases and troops for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and are currently being considered for new US forward bases.

But Nato expansion continues to irritate Russia, especially since it includes the three Baltic countries, formerly part of the Soviet Union.

This week Moscow accused Nato of spying on its military facilities by deploying Awacs reconnaissance jets over future members Latvia and Lithuania.




http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3493560.stm

I think that Nato expansion is good for peace and stabilty in the more unstable areas of Europe. I do question the need for Nato now, I mean who in thier right mind would atack any member Nato state? That would be state suicide. I say keep Nato and help the new armies modernize to keep Europe stable and peaceful so that those new members and all european can prosper in peace. However, I do want Nato to have a new role, the old role of protecting against Russian tank divisons is a thing of the past and Nato should still be ready to fight conventional role should change its role to meet new demands and chanllenges of today. The new EU military force posses no challenge to Nato, and Ameria should not be worried.

[AK-Lover]

Oh great thats all we need! ****ing NATO in slovenia! ****!

[PsihoKeke]

What's so bad about that?

[AK-Lover]

Then we have nato in croatia,bosnia,macedonia and serbia is screwed! :fork:

[martinexsquaddie]

and that would be a bad thing because?

[wholagun]

Dude you wanna talk about Serbia being screwed, Serbia is right now 2nd or 3rd poorest country in Europe. Why is it a bad thing for Slovenia, they are the richest country in the Balkans and the richest country joinging the EU in terms of GDP per capita.

I think its a good thing for Solvenia, they will prosper economically and security wise as welll.

How is Serbia screwed by the new NATO expansion?

[OnTheRocks]

I think its a bad thing.

First and foremost its nothing more than a move by the US to consolidate as much power as they can in Europe.

Secondly the countries within the EU should have loyalty ties to the EU primarily and not NATO. From there and on the EU and Nato should form a defence league.

[oldsoak]

Be interesting when the Serbians join NATO and the EU.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Personally I think its needed for many of the old "soviet bloc" countrys, last thing we would need is 4-5 Chechnya's happening at once. By bringing these nations into NATO, they are generally alot better off. I have yet to see one NATO country spin outta control and turn into chaos, and if all the countrys did need to band together against a threat (i.e. terrorism/war ect) they would already be organized.

[fdt]

I think its a bad thing.

First and foremost its nothing more than a move by the US to consolidate as much power as they can in Europe.

Secondly the countries within the EU should have loyalty ties to the EU primarily and not NATO. From there and on the EU and Nato should form a defence league.As a Polish, I must say that I prefer to speak about the European security with Germans than Swedish... Why? Once one of my German friends told me a story about he had a party with some Swedes in Sweden. After a few beers by the bonfire, one of Swedes thrown a found piece of rusted metal into the fire. All the Germans having party with Swedes have made immediate "DUCK AND COVER". Swedes didn't understand that... In Poland and Germany there still are people who remember the WW II and we as societies are far from fantasizing about security.

[AK-Lover]

Be interesting when the Serbians join NATO and the EU.
Yeah like that's gonna happen, the EU needs to setup it's own force and kick US military presence out of europe. We don't need the americans anymore here, cold war is over, the americans only cause unrest in europe. :bash:

[OnTheRocks]

I think its a bad thing.

First and foremost its nothing more than a move by the US to consolidate as much power as they can in Europe.

Secondly the countries within the EU should have loyalty ties to the EU primarily and not NATO. From there and on the EU and Nato should form a defence league.As a Polish, I must say that I prefer to speak about the European security with Germans than Swedish... Why? Once one of my German friends told me a story about he had a party with some Swedes in Sweden. After a few beers by the bonfire, one of Swedes thrown a found piece of rusted metal into the fire. All the Germans having party with Swedes have made immediate "DUCK AND COVER". Swedes didn't understand that... In Poland and Germany there still are people who remember the WW II and we as societies are far from fantasizing about security.

No tak, ale ja tez jestem polakiem...

And my familiy fought and died in WW2 on all fronts, and yes, some of them was sent to siberia because he was an officer in the polish dragoons, but he mangaged to walk from siberia back to poland where he died a year later from exhaustion.

To be honest the US does not want the EU to become a consolidated powerbase, and why should they? At the moment they hold the position as the lone superpower in the world, there's no reason for them to want things to be different.

[Argyll]

I think its a bad thing.

First and foremost its nothing more than a move by the US to consolidate as much power as they can in Europe.

Secondly the countries within the EU should have loyalty ties to the EU primarily and not NATO. From there and on the EU and Nato should form a defence league.

Odd as I have a feeling that the US Bases in Germany will be relocating to Poland in the next 4-5 years,as the old Warsaw Pact no longer pose such a threat particularily in Germany.

Funny that I dont recall Sweden or Finland being part of NATO either

[OnTheRocks]

There's no point really for sweden to be in NATO..
And why would anyone want to invade us anyways?

[fdt]

No tak, ale ja tez jestem polakiem...

Tak więc widocznie wraz z punktem siedzenia zmienił ci się punkt widzenia... Anyway, allI can see now in Europe is a concerto of the national egoisms. Pattern is one... safer geopolitical localisation more egoism. [/quote]

[Argyll]

There's no point really for sweden to be in NATO..
And why would anyone want to invade us anyways?

For yer hot woman mate!!

I like the Swedes,I used to Drink with guys from SWEDCON in Cyprus,met a group of guys,who had a little Gold Dolphin pinned on their Uniforms,perhaps Swedish Marines?

Sound blokes,and Cyprus was full of "Extremely hot" Swedish Tourists,I could tell you a few stories about some Swedish babes having some Scottish in them!! ;)

[OnTheRocks]

No tak, ale ja tez jestem polakiem...

Tak więc widocznie wraz z punktem siedzenia zmienił ci się punkt widzenia... Anyway, allI can see now in Europe is a concerto of the national egoisms. Pattern is one... safer geopolitical localisation more egoism. [/quote]

Nie, nic mi sie nie zmienlo, to jest ideologicna sprawa...

Safer geographical localisation?
Poland is right next door to Germany and to NATO bases located within Germany, don't tell me that you're still worried about Russia?

[oldsoak]

gold dolphin ? not submariners perchance ?

[mustamato]

I think its a bad thing.

First and foremost its nothing more than a move by the US to consolidate as much power as they can in Europe.

Secondly the countries within the EU should have loyalty ties to the EU primarily and not NATO. From there and on the EU and Nato should form a defence league.

Odd as I have a feeling that the US Bases in Germany will be relocating to Poland in the next 4-5 years,as the old Warsaw Pact no longer pose such a threat particularily in Germany.

Funny that I dont recall Sweden or Finland being part of NATO either

Sweden will be soon probably. The Swedish Defence Forces has made a couple
of proposals, depending on how much the politicians want to cut/save. Joining
NATO is a "necessity" in most of those proposals. Wouldn´t be that hard since
Sweden has already NATO standard in almost all of their equipment. Finland
has still a credible defence with their 21 brigades that is modernized (they also still
have landmines etc) so I don´t think that they will join NATO, although Swedens
decisions usually are quite important for Finland.

But I agree with OnTheRocks.

[Argyll]

Nah not worried about Russia at all,I heard it would be a cheaper option for the US Bases to relocate to Poland,that was all

[Argyll]

gold dolphin ? not submariners perchance ?

Nah not much call for Submariners as Part of the UN contingent in Nicosia,unless you know something I don't! :D

[OnTheRocks]

There's no point really for sweden to be in NATO..
And why would anyone want to invade us anyways?

For yer hot woman mate!!

I like the Swedes,I used to Drink with guys from SWEDCON in Cyprus,met a group of guys,who had a little Gold Dolphin pinned on their Uniforms,perhaps Swedish Marines?

Sound blokes,and Cyprus was full of "Extremely hot" Swedish Tourists,I could tell you a few stories about some Swedish babes having some Scottish in them!! ;)

rofl rofl

Well, this wont affect you, but I used to live in Leicester a few years back, and I got the chance to repay you guys in kind ;)

And as for our girls, well...**** happens :D

[Argyll]

There's no point really for sweden to be in NATO..
And why would anyone want to invade us anyways?

For yer hot woman mate!!

I like the Swedes,I used to Drink with guys from SWEDCON in Cyprus,met a group of guys,who had a little Gold Dolphin pinned on their Uniforms,perhaps Swedish Marines?

Sound blokes,and Cyprus was full of "Extremely hot" Swedish Tourists,I could tell you a few stories about some Swedish babes having some Scottish in them!! ;)

rofl rofl

Well, this wont affect you, but I used to live in Leicester a few years back, and I got the chance to repay you guys in kind ;)

And as for our girls, well...**** happens :D

Not me mate I'm Scottish,all you were doing is poking our leftovers!! ;)

[OnTheRocks]

That's why I said that it would affect you, but hey, atleast I tried, no fault in that :)

[fdt]

Nie, nic mi sie nie zmienlo, to jest ideologiczna sprawa...

Safer geographical localisation?
Poland is right next door to Germany and to NATO bases located within Germany, don't tell me that you're still worried about Russia?

Ideologia ideologią ale siekierka siekierką... :lol: As it comes to the Russians, ask them. Russians as a people are OK (I never had to hope for they love the children too... I just knew it)... but ask them what will be their State's policy for 10, 20 and 30 years from now... I wonder if anyone will dare to tell You smth for sure in this topic...

[Argyll]

That's why I said that it would affect you, but hey, atleast I tried, no fault in that :)

No fault at all!

So which unit has a small gold Dolphin on thier Uniforms?

Attackdykarna ?

[OnTheRocks]

Nie, nic mi sie nie zmienlo, to jest ideologiczna sprawa...

Safer geographical localisation?
Poland is right next door to Germany and to NATO bases located within Germany, don't tell me that you're still worried about Russia?

Ideologia ideologią ale siekierka siekierką... :lol: As it comes to the Russians, ask them. Russians as a people are OK (I never had to hope for they love the children too... I just knew it)... but ask them what will be their State's policy for 10, 20 and 30 years from now... I wonder if anyone will dare to tell You smth for sure in this topic...

Tak to prawda, ale ja bym wolal zeby Europa byla nieozalerzniona od USA i NATO, ale to sie nigdy nie stanie..

Well, in 20 or 30 years time the EU consolidation will be complete (hopefully), but as it stands now I personally think that the US will do what it can to prevent that from happening as smooth as possible for political reasons.
Militarily NATO has served its purpose and is now only used as a bargaining chip.

I assume that many Americans don't even want their troops here either.

Argyll:
I really dont know, I suppose that they could be combat divers.

unless you mean these guys

rofl
http://www.vattenskidor.org/ungdom/delfin/guld.jpg

[Argyll]

rofl
hell they might well have been!!

[Hullebullen]

Aargh! Swedish girls! You spend 11 and a half month trying to get into their panties and then they go to Cyprus and gets laid with the first foul-mouthed, drunk-beyond-belief, deep-red "sun-tanned" brittish guy they find.

It's sad, really...
:lol:

[OnTheRocks]

Aargh! Swedish girls! You spend 11 and a half month trying to get into their panties and then they go to Cyprus and gets laid with the first foul-mouthed, drunk-beyond-belief, deep-red "sun-tanned" brittish guy they find.

It's sad, really...
:lol:

AMATEUR!

[haze99]

Why, would the USA want to consolidate power there? (Do you know something I do not?) We do not run Europe!
I think NATO should have been disolved when the Warsaw Pact went into history in June 1991! (the only reason for NATO to exist in the first place!)

[Nizark]

Why is France in NATO? The jumped out of the planning committee a while back and don't do jack anyway...how about add the new euro states and kick out france :D

[perdurabo]

No tak, ale ja tez jestem polakiem...

Tak więc widocznie wraz z punktem siedzenia zmienił ci się punkt widzenia... Anyway, allI can see now in Europe is a concerto of the national egoisms. Pattern is one... safer geopolitical localisation more egoism.

Nie, nic mi sie nie zmienlo, to jest ideologicna sprawa...

Safer geographical localisation?
Poland is right next door to Germany and to NATO bases located within Germany, don't tell me that you're still worried about Russia?[/quote]
Hmm a znasz powiedzenie przezorny zawsze ubezpieczony?

As for EU and USA you know we see that Germans and French wants to control EU that won't be good for Poland so we need USA as other option it's normal thing allways try to have other options because when main is screwd you can allways go diffrent way :D

[OnTheRocks]

No I haven't heard of that saying..

As for having the US as a counterweight, well..
ow the heck is the EU going to work if some of the members are going to use the US as a counterweight..

ah to hell with it all, the EU is never going to work, might aswell just go hang myself, its all pointless anyways...

[lekomin]

Yeah like that's gonna happen, the EU needs to setup it's own force and kick US military presence out of europe. We don't need the americans anymore here, cold war is over, the americans only cause unrest in europe. :bash:
We would kindly invite all the Americans to Poland if you don't mind. I would bet our security on the US Army then on the EU Army :) I did you get the impression that americans cause unrest in Europe? Unrest in Europe is caused by (in no particular order) farmers, nuclear waste transports, French trade unions, socialist/anarchists in may in London and many other so called "independently" thinking people.
take care
lekomin inc

[perdurabo]

No I haven't heard of that saying..

As for having the US as a counterweight, well..
ow the heck is the EU going to work if some of the members are going to use the US as a counterweight..

ah to hell with it all, the EU is never going to work, might aswell just go hang myself, its all pointless anyways...
:) I would love to see Europe united without borders. But i dont want to see EU controled by Germans and French sorry mate but idealism is maybe good for flower-lowers but in harsh world of politics is like bending over in front of gey parade! :)

[fdt]

Tak to prawda, ale ja bym wolal zeby Europa byla nieozalerzniona od USA i NATO, ale to sie nigdy nie stanie..

You see, the problem is that this "mythical" Europe simply doesn't exist .... (maybe) yet. All i can see now it's a couple of countries conducting an agressive national policies and trying to "sell" it to the rest of Europe as an "European" one. You are "European" when You buy french planes, but when You dare to buy american ones (as Netherlands) You become a "Trojan donkey" (where nobody dares to tell it to the Dutch). Who said Europe must be weak to co-operate with Yanks. Europe can and may build it's own strong military option, but why must it be (french way of thinking) built AGAINST U.S.? From my perspective there is no need to build the "European Defense Identity" in opposition to U.S. If there would be (I think there are ... unfortunatelly)such attempts - it would be better not to build it at all. I am not opposing the concept, all I don't like about that is a purpose that some politicians (seeking desperately a way to pump up the polls) try to push the whole Europe using the Iraqi affair as an explanation. Mr de Villepin would better stick to gloryfying the Napoleon in his books instead trying to play that crappy and funny imperialistic trumpet.... again.
For some it is funny, for some scary. For me it is both funny and scary... just like f*cking a tiger.

[Tengu]

Yeah like that's gonna happen, the EU needs to setup it's own force and kick US military presence out of europe. We don't need the americans anymore here, cold war is over, the americans only cause unrest in europe. :bash:You just made me enjoy the expansion a little more. :fork:

[OnTheRocks]

Tak to prawda, ale ja bym wolal zeby Europa byla nieozalerzniona od USA i NATO, ale to sie nigdy nie stanie..

You see, the problem is that this "mythical" Europe simply doesn't exist .... (maybe) yet. All i can see now it's a couple of countries conducting an agressive national policies and trying to "sell" it to the rest of Europe as an "European" one. You are "European" when You buy french planes, but when You dare to buy american ones (as Netherlands) You become a "Trojan donkey" (where nobody dares to tell it to the Dutch). Who said Europe must be weak to co-operate with Yanks. Europe can and may build it's own strong military option, but why must it be (french way of thinking) built AGAINST U.S.? From my perspective there is no need to build the "European Defense Identity" in opposition to U.S. If there would be (I think there are ... unfortunatelly)such attempts - it would be better not to build it at all. I am not opposing the concept, all I don't like about that is a purpose that some politicians (seeking desperately a way to pump up the polls) try to push the whole Europe using the Iraqi affair as an explanation. Mr de Villepin would better stick to gloryfying the Napoleon in his books instead trying to play that crappy and funny imperialistic trumpet.... again.
For some it is funny, for some scary. For me it is both funny and scary... just like f*cking a tiger.

It could very well exists. If the EU was a classroom of students studying for an exam, then the US is the man in the grey trenchcoat standing outside trying to lure kids like poland away with candy...that's all :roll:

[perdurabo]

It could very well exists. If the EU was a classroom of students studying for an exam, then the US is the man in the grey trenchcoat standing outside trying to lure kids like poland away with candy...that's all :roll:
How old you are?

[fdt]

Tak to prawda, ale ja bym wolal zeby Europa byla nieozalerzniona od USA i NATO, ale to sie nigdy nie stanie..

You see, the problem is that this "mythical" Europe simply doesn't exist .... (maybe) yet. All i can see now it's a couple of countries conducting an agressive national policies and trying to "sell" it to the rest of Europe as an "European" one. You are "European" when You buy french planes, but when You dare to buy american ones (as Netherlands) You become a "Trojan donkey" (where nobody dares to tell it to the Dutch). Who said Europe must be weak to co-operate with Yanks. Europe can and may build it's own strong military option, but why must it be (french way of thinking) built AGAINST U.S.? From my perspective there is no need to build the "European Defense Identity" in opposition to U.S. If there would be (I think there are ... unfortunatelly)such attempts - it would be better not to build it at all. I am not opposing the concept, all I don't like about that is a purpose that some politicians (seeking desperately a way to pump up the polls) try to push the whole Europe using the Iraqi affair as an explanation. Mr de Villepin would better stick to gloryfying the Napoleon in his books instead trying to play that crappy and funny imperialistic trumpet.... again.
For some it is funny, for some scary. For me it is both funny and scary... just like f*cking a tiger.

It could very well exists. If the EU was a classroom of students studying for an exam, then the US is the man in the grey trenchcoat standing outside trying to lure kids like poland away with candy...that's all :roll: What's all? Are You trying to convince me that EU is rather a shower room in a Colombian prison? You could succeed if You wouldn't tell me smth about Your ideological bias at the beginning. Why instead discussing opinions You use such a naive and pathetic parallells? is that an elaborate insult? What are You trying to show this way? Is it a European attitude that can be defined "if someone doesn't agree my point of view must be a moron"?

[OnTheRocks]

its not an insult.
It was not the best metaphor either

I just said earlier on in the thread that the US is trying to consolidate power within the EU and NATO is a good way of doing this eventhough it has fullfilled its reasons for existance...

Lojalty should be first and foremost to the EU and secondly to a possible defence legue with the US and Canada etc...

I didnt say it was wrong to buy US produced weaponry, but how will EU ever become a Federation if a bunch of countries have defensive pacts that some others are not part of etc?
There will be too much friction.


As for Germany and France ruling the EU as tey please, well...hopefully that will change...

[perdurabo]

OTR you hope that will change? and if not what will you do? cry and run to mamy? nation canot relay on hope and assumings only strong facts documents and allways few backup plans...

[OnTheRocks]

*sigh*

yes, I will run and cry to "mamy".

People were supposed to give their oppinions and thoughts in this thread, but as always here on militaryphotos.net people revert to trying to act as hardcases.
I gave my opinion and as I said its from an idelogical point of view, however you fail to understand that as you probably failed to understand the comparison I drew earlier on...

Its not like I don't understand why Poland in particular is drawn to NATO, however here's a strong fact for you: NATO has played its part in the world.

Its now time to form new defensive legues with new objectives.

A question to people who know:
Is it possible for a nation that is a part of NATO to build bases in the US?
And if not, then why?

[fdt]

OTR you hope that will change? and if not what will you do? cry and run to mamy? nation canot relay on hope and assumings only strong facts documents and allways few backup plans...Hmmmm.... I wouldn't put it this way. No matter how hard the documents signed are, it cannot be a guarantee on it's own. There is always a political will to meet the obligations that must stand behind.... especially in the defense matters. This will is always based on mutual (or multilateral) trust that needs to be built. What kind of treatment or encourageing have we experienced so far? Wasn't it "shut up and buy french weapons" ? Where do one find a platform to buy a trust on defense policy (it's serious not a game as some think)? Furthermore, someone demands from us to break a link (in the defence matters) with a country that is very influential and who we all (Europeans) should be grateful (to some reasonable extent) for changing the shape of Europe into better way what accidentally was a good business for them and for whole Europe for last 60 years (for Poland only 14). What is a rationale we are given from Paris and Berlin to explain that "need" for change of our policy? "We should be grateful to EU that it let us to join... Hmmm we are grateful, but why in the name of that "new gratitude" must we break our "old" gratitude.... when we see no contradiction in EU and US defense interest? In general we feel that there is no gratitude that should be discussed in this context but national (and European) interests we have. Why we are made to choose between allies when we see no need to do it? Didn't the "old" Europe benefited of the alliance with US? Have they forgot how this was when they were in need? Doesn't the EU see any future benefits if the EU and US policies would be arranged accordingly to achieve a synergy? Don't we have the same threats at our doors? I want to be a part of the EU that is a US ally... is it a sin? An European sin, we are now being spanked for? Why the hell the European "defense inentity" MUST be construed in opposition to US? Can anyone tell me this?

[fdt]

A question to people who know:
Is it possible for a nation that is a part of NATO to build bases in the US?
And if not, then why?Answer is very very simple. There is no such need. If there was a particular weapons system US wouldn't have and EU would have it and there would be a need to install it in US for the sake of all NATO defense - there You would have a case when a EU base could reasonably be placed on US soil. So far the cases (many of them) were opposite - and that is why there are US bases in Europe and there are no European bases in US. Yanks have it all in best quality!

[OnTheRocks]

A question to people who know:
Is it possible for a nation that is a part of NATO to build bases in the US?
And if not, then why?Answer is very very simple. There is no such need. If there was a particular weapons system US wouldn't have and EU would have it and there would be a need to install it in US for the sake of all NATO defense - there You would have a case when a EU base could reasonably be placed on US soil. So far the cases (many of them) were opposite - and that is why there are US bases in Europe and there are no European bases in US. Yanks have it all in best quality!

You didnt understand my question.
I don't care if the yanks have got the cream of the crap, I was asking if it would be possible at all..

[fdt]

I don't care if the yanks have got the cream of the crap, I was asking if it would be possible at all.. Ask Yanks, that's the fastest way to get the answer. My guess is: if their asses would be on fire and EU could ease their pain, it would be possible.... as it was in the opposite configuration.

[cut]

Be interesting when the Serbians join NATO and the EU.

Nato more likely if at all, Serbia won't be able to join the EU for decades, especially with more intergration.

[Sixgun Symphony]

I think its a bad thing.

First and foremost its nothing more than a move by the US to consolidate as much power as they can in Europe.

Secondly the countries within the EU should have loyalty ties to the EU primarily and not NATO. From there and on the EU and Nato should form a defence league.

The Cold War has been over for more than a decade now. NATO has outlived its mission.

Yes, I think France would love to be at the center of power in the EU.

Yes, many Americans would love to bring our troops home from Europe.

[GazB]

NATO was created as a defencive organistation to oppose the Soviets. (The Warsaw Pact didn't officially exist till after NATO was created.)

The current NATO however is not a defencive org. The action in Kosovo had nothing to do with defending any of the Signatory or additional NATO nations. It was used as a European intervention force.
As such it represents a real threat to Russia. Equally the addition of former Eastern aligned nations further makes a mockery of the still binding CFE treaty that was once about the ballance of conventional forces in Europe and now is so lopsided as to be rediculous.
As it continues to expand the only consequences I can see are a more militarised Russia (in response to a perceived threat) and the destruction of the CFE treaty... the latter being a problem for Russia as it limits forces it can send to Chechnia and regions near the caucaus.

On the NATO and EU side of the fence the cost of absorbing less than amazing economies will likely cause further problems... problems no doubt exacerbated by likely internal movement of unemployed to either richer states or those states with the best welfare system.

Of course the US government will oppose anything that makes Europe unified... it has already stated in its plans for the future that it will do everything in its power to maintain its current military and economic superiority... no room for two bullies in the same class.

[fdt]

NATO was created as a defencive organistation to oppose the Soviets. (The Warsaw Pact didn't officially exist till after NATO was created.)
The current NATO however is not a defencive org. The action in Kosovo had nothing to do with defending any of the Signatory or additional NATO nations. It was used as a European intervention force.
As such it represents a real threat to Russia..

Yes, it was created as a tool to deter Soviets from any idea of military visiting the neighbour of soviet bloc. After fall of SU it had to change, and it did - into a security organization to promote stabilization. Joining the Germany/France, Greece/Turkey it certainly helped to prevent old conflicts to ignite into a new wars. As it comes to Kosovo and Bosnia, what have the OSCE and Un achieved there? Nothing. Once more NATO has proved there it's efficiency, despite different circumstances that these assumed at it's founding.

Pls tell me (and others) what kind of threat does NATO pose for Russia now, if we assume that Russia wants to run a normal peaceful policy (as it declares)? What particular events You predict that may happen (because of NATO) to endanger the Russia's security?


Equally the addition of former Eastern aligned nations further makes a mockery of the still binding CFE treaty that was once about the ballance of conventional forces in Europe and now is so lopsided as to be rediculous.
As it continues to expand the only consequences I can see are a more militarised Russia (in response to a perceived threat) and the destruction of the CFE treaty... the latter being a problem for Russia as it limits forces it can send to Chechnia and regions near the Caucaus..

CFE treaty is an dead horse indeed, but it is because there is no SU anymore and because the nations of Europe have (or are in the process) reduced their armed forces well below it's limits. Without changing the one letter in the treaty most of the countries have reduced their military capabilities... (do You still feel the threat?) You suggest that Russia is only country limited with the CFE treaty... limited below it's defense needs. Well, how it's possible? Do You still feel that it's a Russia against the whole World game? Does Russia need to have the limits that will be a counterbalance for all NATO? If Yes,tell me why?

Another myth is that the forces Russia had according to CFE treaty were enough to fight NATO but now they are not sufficient to tame the Chechnia... Hey, there must be smth wrong with Your calculations.


On the NATO and EU side of the fence the cost of absorbing less than amazing economies will likely cause further problems... problems no doubt exacerbated by likely internal movement of unemployed to either richer states or those states with the best welfare system..

I must say that I really appreciate Your concern about NATO countries' economies, but don't worry, nobody here will spend the milk money for the guns.


Of course the US government will oppose anything that makes Europe unified... it has already stated in its plans for the future that it will do everything in its power to maintain its current military and economic superiority... no room for two bullies in the same class..

What US govt can do if all (or at least few strongest countries) EU will agree the terms of it's "defensive identity". Do You think that they will start to bomb Paris, Berlin or Brussels? I don't think so. In my opinion, there is no real will to break all military (NATO) ties with US. Nobody really wants it now. Political tensions about Iraq are now dissolving. Political unrest between Washington and Berlin/Paris has not even touched the foundations of NATO as it is. Dreams of EU defense alliance that would be completely autonomous and antagonized with US is political fiction (or rather some govts wishful thinking) now.