Back to international relations and American Foreign Policy...
VP Dick Cheney was in Georgia yesterday affirming US support for Saakashvili's government. After pledging $1B (that's billion) in reconstruction aid for the country, Mr. Cheney is now suggesting that the US would encourage Georgian entry to NATO.
Here are some questions to consider in light of what we're talking about in class: Why give so much aid to Georgia and how do you think this deal affects Russian decision-making? Is it a credible commitment to the country? NATO membership carries a pledge to defend a country against attack. Do you think NATO would actually allow Georgian entry in the near future? If not, then why would the VP make this statement?
Also, there's a large literature on the effects of aid, the promotion of democracy and support of foreign leaders (democratic or otherwise). For my take on this literature, see this recent paper.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm having trouble finding your paper at the link you provided.
As for Georgian entry into NATO, I too doubt other NATO nations would support their entry. Not on merits of their independence, but on fears of upsetting Russia. From a United States position, it makes plenty of sense that they want Georgia under the treaty. Then, if Russia invades Georgia again, Article 5 would theoretically be invoked. In other words, all nations under the NATO Treaty would be "required" to support Georgia.
The move makes sense on a few levels for the United States. America has been in the business of supporting nations abroad which are very independent, especially when in conflict with a larger, more centralized foreign government. Georgia is America's best ally in the region when it comes to Georgia. Militarily, they don't add anything. Politically, they do. They help shore up United States support in a region where Russian loyalties are prevalent.
Now, would NATO actually allow Georgia's entry? Given the timeline, it's probably to quick to hope for their acceptance
Than being said, Georgia's eventual enrollment in NATO is something that has been considered for a long time. They've been requesting such protection for awhile, for the exact reason they fear Russia's military might coming down on them. It's not like the U.S. is just pulling this out of the blue. They simply now want to speed up the process to protect Georgia and U.S. interests in the region.
Honestly, I don't think the $1B aid package and NATO pledge by the U.S. changes U.S. and Russian relations. Both countries are already at extreme odds. This doesn't change that.
The longer Russia continues to defy Georgia's independence, the more likely European nations are to rally to Georgia's cause. NATO is already primarily opposed to the occupation, and still believes the slow withdraw is a clear sign that Russia refuses to cooperate with Europe.
In my opinion, Russia is treading dangerously close to finding itself in the position of having more enemies than it can possibly handle.
Follow the link to the line marked "page proofs". It's there in .pdf form.
From a realist perspective like what we have been reading about the Cold War, we are acting to maintain the balance of power. We are trying to teach the Russians how to behave by asserting that we will not stand for these kinds of actions. I doubt that Georgia will be allowed to enter NATO. Realistically we are not prepared for any kind of armed conflict with Russia, so the best we can do to keep them in check is give a lot of money to Georgia. The VP probably realizes that the likelihood of Georgia getting into NATO is slim but if we push for it then we are at least telling Russia that we are taking steps to punish their actions or at least prevent future aggression. We are using the instruments currently available to us, money and hopefully an international coalition to pressure them into behaving how we want them to. We are trying to be proactive and concerned about containing Russian aggression/expansion to maintain the current balance of power.
Post a Comment