France says NATO force should stay in Macedonia

Reuters | 9/08

[oxi-nato]

GENVAL, Belgium, Sept 8 (Reuters) - France said on Saturday that NATO should remain in charge of a military force to protect foreign observers in Macedonia after alliance forces have completed collecting ethnic Albanian rebel weapons.

Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine said it was clear that an international security force would be necessary after NATO's current mission ends on September 26. He rejected a suggestion by EU Macedonia envoy Francois Leotard for the European Union to take charge. "If the new European security and defence arrangements were organised enough for this mission, it would be a good idea. But because it isn't quite ready yet, I think it is more sensible, easier and more practical to act in a NATO framework," Vedrine said.

German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer earlier called for a new NATO force with a United Nations mandate to prevent any vacuum after the arms collection operation, but France's endorsement was significant give its reticence about NATO. EU diplomats said the Macedonian government was reluctant to extend NATO's role in the country and would prefer a U.N. force, but European governments did not want to serve under a U.N. command and wanted to keep the United States engaged.

[oxi-nato]

IT'S UP TO MACEDONIA AND NOT THE NEW WORLD ORDER [U.S., NATO AND EU]

[F-117A]

The Fourth-Reich marches on!

[Vigilanteman]

Macedonia is a good job for the French. They aren't in any position to give advice to NATO.

[American Soldier]

Yes this is a lot more important than China's advances in Asia and Russia's inability to keep track of it's military resources. All Westerners must now divert their attention away from the coming disaster in the Pacific and worry about the duration of allied forces' involvement in Macedonia. Don't waste time with sideshow distractions like North Korea either.

Signed,
Jiang Zemin

[Ranger]

What I found most interesting about the French and German comments is their desire to engage Nato in Macedonia instead of the EU force. In practicality the only real difference is whether the U.S. is thrown in to the mix. It seems to me that the French and Germans are doing everything they can to keep the U.S. engaged in the region.

By all rights, the newly emerging EU fighting force, such as it is, should be able to handle this job without the US.

The German Foreign Minister was quoted in the NYT as saying to the effect that only the European allies of the US would come to its assistance in asia, and to paraphrase him, consequently the US had to keep its engagement in europe. Yeah right. DOD is moving its alliances and resources to asia where China represents the next and greatest threat to the U.S. and its allies.

One factor that might change this intended disengagement by the U.S. is if Albanians try to carve out northern areas of Greece next year as Fusion indicated that they would. I don't think any Nato states will tolerate this. More likely Montenegro would be a target. Viewing the situation for the Albanians from the distance of America, I'd suggest their best course of action would be to consolidate their gains as best they can and try to rebuild the economy of the region. Somehow, I doubt this will happen however, as the temptation to use trained cadres increases, lest they loose them to more practical occupations, makes continued incursions almost inevitable.

[Hoplite]

Just between the two of us, Fusion is as Albanian as Jesse Jackson, and his posts are intended to whip up anti-Albanian sentiment.

Straw-man gambit.

Just call him on one of his Peter Chappell remarks and see how far you get.

Regards,

[onyx]

I second your comments, and add one of my own: I hate France!

[American Soldier]

With respect to the German gentleman, if anybody thinks anybody in Europe besides Britain (which is not European) would come to the aid of the U.S. in the event of an attack on U.S. forces in Asia, they need to pull their head out of their fourth point of contact and check NATO's actual policies.

The Euro-peons would have every right to say, in the event of an attack on U.S. forces in Asia, that nothing in the Atlantic Charter requires them to come to our aid. And do you think any of them would do it out of love for the U.S. and gratitude for the Marshall Plan? I doubt it.

We ought to: reopen the Subic Bay naval facilities, endore Phillipine claims on the Spratleys, and stop making veiled threats to Taiwan that we will abandon support for them if they declare independence (suggesting they don't have the right to do so undermines the legitimacy of their government), and leave Europe to screw things up as they are capable of doing without our counsel.

[Ranger]

Totally agree. In my humble opinion, in Asia we would be better off tightening our relationships with Japan, Taiwan, S. Korea, Australia,Phillipines and India. A policy of containment gets a bad rap these days, but that's what will be required to maintain peace with China in the years ahead. I can't see France or Germany taking much interest in helping us in time of need. Gloating at us or appeasement toward China would be more in character.

[American Soldier]

Yes they'll just say "Oh look where the Americans' arrogance got them now!" Aside from substantive issues of who we shall ally with, we need greater coherence in our foreign policy; I don't see a bunch of unconnected unlilateral defense agreements as the right solution. We need one democratic alliance of the Pacific, dedicated to mutual defense in the event of any aggression (i.e. DPRK or PRC attack). I would look towards the establishment of a mutual free trade agreement with the first world nations among them as well, as a way to shift their economic focus away from the PRC.

The Chinese are basically the new Nazis or the New Persians. They think of themselves as supermen, it's the whole Middle Kingdom mentality that's at the root of the danger. IMHO, the sooner we demonstrate to them that they are not invincible, the less likely it is that a general open conflict will emerege...

[Ranger]

Let's see if a free trade agreement is brought up with Australia when their prime minister visits. I think that is later this month. Also suggest you take a look at Henry Kissingers new book, "Does America Need a Foreign Policy." for an interesting discussion of the asian alliance challenge; namely that each allies unilateral relationship with the US is more important than their relationship with each other and their neighbors. Most of our asian allies have no historical alliances with our various other asian allies and indeed have been enemies in the past. In other words, unlike Europe where US was the new kid on the block, in Asia the US is the hub on which the other allies (spooks) revolve.