Posted on 07/19/2009 1:35:26 PM PDT by lizol
Obama: "Hey, New Europe, we are scrapping the plans for a missile shield because my poll numbers will tick upward a few notches."
kabar: "Sorry guys and gals, we don't have the money anyway, and besides, you should build one yourself."
From the letter: As Central and Eastern European (CEE) intellectuals and former policymakers, we care deeply about the future of the transatlantic relationship...We are Atlanticist voices within NATO and the EU...Twenty years after the end of the Cold War, however, we see that Central and Eastern European countries are no longer at the heart of American foreign policy.
These former leaders and intellectuals should be asking why "Old Europe" is not "Atlanticist." With the fall of the Soviet Union, it is reasonable to expect that Central and Eastern Europe would not be at the "heart of American foreign policy." For the umpteenth time, I suggest that they should direct their concerns to the EU and their NATO colleagues in Europe first so that these organizations reach a consensus on what their foreign policy objectives are and how they define their relationship with the US.
You can create all the phony strawmen you want. Obama has not scrapped the ABM shield yet, but he might. This letter may give him some backbone on the issue. But it would be far better if such a letter came from the EU and NATO reaffirming the stationing of ABMs in Poland and the Czech Republic. And the letter would have be far better if it had not attacked the Bush administration and tossed in extraneous issues like the visa wavier program.
The transatlantic relationship can only be strengthened if the Europeans recognize that they can no longer expect the US to shoulder the major burden of defense in the region. Old Europe and New Europe need to get their own house in order first.
With all your fixation on cost, you should probably look at both sides of the ledger. And asking pre-Sarkozy France or pre-Merkel Germany for help regarding Russia is a fool's errand. The U.S. should lead, because the U.S. has vital interests in the region. Your policy recommendation appears to be, "get out of their way but complain if we won't get what we need," scattered with weasel-words such as "would be far better," "should be asking," and "consensus."
The EU encompasses 27 countries with a combined population of 499 million people. They are part of the developed world with a huge economy. They are capable of defending themselves against any potential and existential threat. They are spending only about 1% on defense. They are perfectly capable of defending their vital interests, especially if the US provides the nuclear umbrella and remains committed to such organizations as NATO.
My "fixation" with costs is firmly rooted in reality. The US is sinking under an ocean of debt. And we have the perfect storm brewing with the coming bankruptcy of our entitlement programs in less than a decade. The UK had to make some choices on its global presence, e.g., no troops east of Suez, when it realized it could no longer afford guns and butter. We are heading in the same direction and matters will be made worse if Obama is successful with his healthcare and cap and trade programs.
The Soviet Union spent its way out of existence. The US will be faced with some very hard choices in the not too distant future. And it wouldn't matter who was President. The chickens are coming home to roost as a result of our profligate ways. Adding to that is our importation of poverty due to our pro-population growth immigration policies that bring in 1.2 million legal immigrants annually, most of whom are poor and undeducated and will represent a net drain on our economy. We will add another 135 million people in the next 40 years or the equivalent of adding another France and Germany to our population, 75%due to immigration.
What good of Reagan and Bush’s (senior) anticommunist policy that brought freedom to Eastern Europe if their successors push us again into the hands of the same Soviet (Russian) bear?
Mr. Kabar, you are outraged by the East European nations which critisise G.W.Bush for Iraqi war. I am Polish and I live in Poland, so let me say that these are my thoughts too. However, I don’t critisise him for toppling Saddam’s regime as a rule, because that was a correct decision. I criticise him for neglecting NATO countries’ security by too confident relations with Russia and too big concessions in order to obtain her approval for US forces engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan. In other words, rob Peter to pay Paul.
Free Independent Poland has always been a staunch ally of the US-British alliance. It was, it is and it will be.
From the very beginning Poland had her substantial contribution to the operation Iraqi Freedom. However, if all that America can do for Poland’s security is to send her two units of unarmed and inoperational Patriot missiles, then this is rather a good theme for German and Russian cabarets that have much to laugh of our Atlantic commitment.
How would you feel Mr Kabar if you heard such mockery one by one, because we have to hear it regularly! “Look, Poles!”, they say, “Give them more Polish soldiers to be killed in Iraq, so maybe one small day they will send you the third INOPERATIONAL batery of Patriots.
I’ve always been pro American and proud of America’s freedom policy for the world. So, if I start to doubt, then again, who doesn’t?
I understand your concerns having lived in Warsaw 1981-83. Living in a communist state is something I would recommend to a lot of these people who have no idea what it means to live in a totalitarian state. I know that the Poles have no desire to return to that kind of oppression.
Although I understand your fear of the "Russian Bear," Poland's membership in NATO offers you protection from any forcible seizure of Poland by Russia. And I doubt that there are any significant internal forces that would want to return to the days of communism.
You will have to educate me as to what specific concessions Bush made to Russia in order to obtain "approval" to enter Afghanistan and Iraq.
From the very beginning Poland had her substantial contribution to the operation Iraqi Freedom. However, if all that America can do for Poland’s security is to send her two units of unarmed and inoperational Patriot missiles, then this is rather a good theme for German and Russian cabarets that have much to laugh of our Atlantic commitment.
As a member of NATO, Poland has a very strong commitment from the United States and the other member countries under Article 5 of the NATO treary, i.e.,
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.
I’ve always been pro American and proud of America’s freedom policy for the world. So, if I start to doubt, then again, who doesn’t?
I don't know when this doubt started, but you should never doubt America's commitment to freedom and our promise contained in the NATO Treaty.
As to the letter we talk about. Although formally addressed to US presidents, I think it was actually addressed to Russia. Its aim was to notify the Kremlin and the Russian public opinion that the countries in Eastern Europe do not feel secure because of Russian foreign policy. We know that Russia always tries to present herself as a “besieged country” when talking about any NATO installations in new member countries and then tries to intimidate them, threatening them with a first preemptive attack if need be. To me, this doesn't work, but for the large part of the public opinion this is something that wake up fears of the past. This kind of letter signed by eminent individuals gives an outstanding opportunity for USA to recall the NATO treaty with its Article5 OUTLOUD. Although formally addressed to those who signed the letter, that would be a clear message to Russia that the NATO alliance is still alive and kicking and that Russia should be aware of it.
Anyway, this letter has already worked. Russian press writes about our countries calling us “dishonorable US little dogs”. As far as I'm concerned this is not an insult but a way they expressed their helplessness. The strong one never insults the weak one because he doesn’t need it as he can hit him anytime he wants. The insults are characteristic for the weak bad guys who want to hit the strong one but they can't.
As to honor the Russian talk about, I'd rather be a pawn among freedom loving people than a general among bloody murderers of millions of my compatriots (Katyn Massacre for example).
Have you ever wondered why there are 10 million American of Polish origin in the USA nowadays? Ask Russians, too :-)
Bookmark
ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.