Ukraine seeks Nato relationship

[muriel_volestrangler]

The Ukrainian president, Viktor Yushchenko, confirmed today at a Nato summit attended by George Bush that the former Soviet country wants to become a member of Nato.

The announcement is likely to heighten Moscow's concern that Ukraine's new western-leaning president will try to take the country out of Russia's sphere of influence.

Mr Yushchenko confirmed his intention at a news conference following the Nato/Ukraine summit at Nato's headquarters in Brussels. During the meeting he had appealed to alliance leaders to back his moves for deeper relations between Nato and Ukraine. He said afterwards: "The changes in Ukraine open the way to elevate relations with the alliance."

Before the summit Mr Yushchenko met the US president, who is on the second day of a three-nation visit to Europe which has been interpreted as an attempt to mend fences following the rift caused by the US-led invasion of Iraq. Yesterday, on the first day of his trip, Mr Bush said: "Ukraine should be welcomed by the Europe Atlantic family."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1419978,00.html

A good idea? I don't know - I'm having difficulty knowing what membership of NATO is for these days, apart from a guarantee that the USA won't actually attack you, in return for a tendency to back the USA's military adventures.

[neweurope]

1. *grin* Apt description! I'lll be using it, if I may :)

--------------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[blackhorse]

2. It is a damned shame ...

I recall when NATO had a real mission, and when the presence of nations engaged in genuine partnerships had some kind of meaning. The political nonsense and military adventurism of the last decade has distracted many people on both sides of the Atlantic.

I fear that given any obvious sense of a threat in Europe, many don't realize the utter seriousness of the situation in the Ukraine. Not only is part of the country flirting with civil war, but that civil war might be backed by the Russians who are none too happy to see their influence wane so dramatically.

I think rather than tossing out NATO as an institution, it should be restructured to include a more focused mission, and most especially be given a mission that means more to Europe on a day to day basis. NATO as an institution can work very well -- but it is just as hapless as any other institution without good leadership. Yushchenko is trying desperately to shore up his nation's defense.

The Ukraine's difficulties notwithstanding, I am far from convinced that moving NATO's membership right up to Russia's borders is a wise move. That will only flame Russian fears of invasion.

The sad truth is, the real time to do something, on BOTH the U.S. and Europe's part, is when communism collapsed in Russia. Both the U.S. and Europe missed a tremendous opportunity to help to continue the ahistorical trend for positive change that was unleashed by Gorbachev. It was short-sighted for all involved, and the chicken will likely come home to roost all too soon. Had more positive action been taken then, the future of a democratic Ukraine might not be such a large question mark.

Cheers

BH