http://www.newsmax.com/weyrich/russia_in_nato/2008/08/20/123656.html
www.newsmax.com
<http://oascentral.newsmax.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.newsmax.com/we
yrich/244094731/x30/default/empty.gif/52597677656b69724f46454141567569?x>
Russia Should Have Been Part of NATO
Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:22 AM
By: Paul M. Weyrich
Article Font Size <javascript:setActiveStyleSheet('default');>
<javascript:setActiveStyleSheet('largeFont');>
Surveying the wreckage in Georgia where more than 100,000 people are without
homes, running water and food, the question remains: What could have been
done to avert this disaster? There was a solution promoted by a number of us
soon after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Knowing that historically Russia has been nervous about its borders, we
foresaw the possibility that not only Georgia but Armenia, Lithuania,
Latvia, Estonia and Ukraine would be vulnerable to Russian aggression. A
number of us proposed that Russia be made a part of NATO. If Russia were in
NATO it would not be in a position to attack its neighbors. But just as
important, if its neighbors tried to provoke Russia, NATO would be required
to put down any such provocation.
The first to broach that idea was Edward (Ed) Lozansky, president of the
American University in Moscow. He discussed the idea with me and my
colleague, William S. (Bill) Lind, who thought it was an excellent idea
which would solve a myriad of problems.
In Moscow, the director of the interregional group in the old Soviet
parliament, Arkady Murashev, also supported the idea. In due course it was
put to Boris Yeltsin, the first freely elected president of Russia. He was
open to the idea. So why did it go nowhere? Because cold warriors, who have
made careers of fighting the Russians and justified ever increasing defense
budgets accordingly, put an end to it.
If Russia were in NATO and bound by its requirements, it no longer would be
considered our enemy. That was not useful to those who had spent a lifetime
in Cold War activities. President George H. W. Bush’s advisers were
absolutely against this idea. If he had had the foresight to disregard their
counsel and push for our idea how different history very probably would be
today.
I recall visiting with Bush in the Oval Office after Dr. Robert (Bob)
Krieble and I returned from Moscow, where we had found that Mikhail
Gorbachev, the political rage at the time over here, was not popular in
Russia. Yeltsin was much more popular.
I told President Bush that if Gorbachev were replaced, his replacement could
be someone more to our liking. Bush said he wished he could have believed
that, but told me, “I live every day in fear that Gorbachev will be replaced
by a Stalinist-type figure.” That information was incorrect. And when the
idea of admitting Russia to NATO came up the advice Bush received continued
to be incorrect.
What now? Clearly, not just Georgia but the Baltic states and Ukraine are
worried. They all are concerned because they have democratically elected
governments, which Moscow doesn’t regard highly. Are we to rush to make
Georgia and Ukraine a part of NATO? Could American soldiers be sent to
defend Georgia against Russia?
In the long run, I don’t think this would work. Is it now impossible for us
to start over? Must Russia be our enemy? If it were, would we be prepared to
fight another war? I don’t have the answers but it seems to me we must begin
to think outside the box. Surely we must have new advisers with new
thinking. The alternative is to risk sinking into the abyss of a new war
with Russia. Do we need this? No.
Paul M. Weyrich is chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
<javascript:printPage();> Print Page
|
<http://www.newsmax.com/forward_page/> Forward Page
|
<http://www.newsmax.com/contact/editorial/> E-mail Us
<<attachment: image001.gif>>
<<image002.jpg>>
<<image003.jpg>>
