With Google, that indicated how the opposition of Germany, France and Russia to the Iraq war was causing them to forge muh stroinger political, economic, and military links.
There has yet to be a real tripartite union formed, but for example, theere are much stronger Frranco-German links being forged, with France and Germany more stringly advocating for the more rapid formation of a European Union Military force separate from NATO, And the same between France and Russia. Right now Russia, having been at one time, the worlds other superpower, is trying to muscle Germany, France and NATO, bt this is a lot of bluster, and inevitable they will form some kind of unions. France is the lynchpin, because they quit NATO, and therefore have little or no say in NATO operations with the United States, while at the same time, right wing hawks in the Washington are tying to foce NATO to bedissobved, because the right wing hawks see a stronger European miltary as a threat to U.S. hegemony. The U.S. is using the Anglo_American alliance to try to use the British Iinfluence in the E.E.C. to hamstring and stall the formatin of an E.U. m,ilitary in whihc the U.S. plays no part in the alliance and the Brits are stirring up all kinds of dopmestic opposiiton to Britain being a part of a United Europe Military because they are aware than the stronger te E.U becomes economically, the less powerful the U.S. will be in being able to exert dstrong influence in the eastern hemisphere:
November 26, 2001: #5565
#14
strana.ru
November 26, 2001
Russia and NATO to Be Equal Partners in The Group of "20"
The Alliance is concerned with Moscow's role in a new format
By Yuri Alexeyev
It is not accidental that NATO's Secretary General George Robertson decided to start his visit to Russia from Volgograd. The North Atlantic Alliance has not forgotten Russia's role in the struggle against fascism that was defeated as a result of active interaction between Russia and other members of the anti-Hitler coalition- the United States, Britain and France. NATO understands that Russia's role in a new coalition set up to combat against a new evil like international terrorism is also important. Therefore, the Alliance has agreed to elevate the level of cooperation with Russia.
Today, the civilized world has collided with new threats and challenges which no country or bloc can simply withstand alone. In the face of these new threats, the West has finally realized that its interests really coincide with Russian interests. The NATO secretary general emphasized at each meeting with Russian officials and journalists that the convergence of interests was not just declarative and had some objective grounds.
Mr. Robertson shared the opinion of Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov that the Russia-NATO Joint Permanent Council had turned into a place for idle talk which leads nowhere. Everybody has become convinced of that, he added. Other mechanisms, new in form and in essence, are to be developed under these new conditions to effectively cope with problems like terrorism, extremism, drug trafficking and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction as well as to find quick answers to other challenges whose nature is yet to be predicted and assessed. Officials in Moscow and the European capitals understand the need to create new mechanisms but the hard "Cold War" legacy is clearly preventing the West from believing that the Russian side does not have any intention to use the work within these mechanisms to produce a negative impact on NATO's internal processes.
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/5565-14.cfmBush 'disappointed' by NATO stalemate
France, Russia, Germany unite on Iraq
Monday, February 10, 2003 Posted: 9:50 PM EST (0250 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush pronounced himself "disappointed" after France, Germany and Belgium blocked a U.S.-led effort to begin planning to defend Turkey in the event of a war with Iraq.
"I don't understand that decision. It affects the alliance in a negative way ... when you are not able to make a statement of mutual defense," Bush said.
Turkey, the alliance's only Muslim member, immediately requested emergency consultations under NATO's defense treaty, believed to be the first time a member state has ever done so.
U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld criticized the three nations for not supporting the U.S. initiative, saying they were preventing "NATO from fulfilling its obligation" to a member
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/02/10/sprj.irq.wrap/NATO Looking for New Ways to Engage Russia
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
BRUSSELS, Belgium, Dec. 18, 2001 - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will meet with fellow NATO defense ministers to discuss how to fashion a relationship with Russia that's appropriate for the 21st Century.
Rumsfeld is following up on an earlier agreement between President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring Russia more fully into the West. "The president and President Putin have both indicated a desire to find ways for Russia to interact with NATO in a way that is satisfactory from Russia's standpoint and appropriate from NATO's standpoint," Rumsfeld said. AFRTS Radio Report: SecDef speaks at NATO meetings in Brussels
Rumsfeld has said many times that the United States wants to get away from the atmosphere and relations that dominated the Cold War. He said he believes it's a new world, and Russia is no longer a foe.
Rumsfeld has said he would like to see relations with Russia conducted the same way as American relations are conducted with Canada or Japan.
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Dec2001/n12182001_200112182.htmlNotice the Rumsfel language, they dont want to have to deal with Europe/Russia as a ninfied group, but preref to deal with each nation separately as is done with japan.
The U.S. strategy is the old divide and conquer. As the U.S. has had enormos say in European Defense as a senior partner in NATO, they strongly object to a European alliance which excludes the U.S. Freance and Germany jointly possess industrial base the the U.S. no longer posseses, and if the U.S. cannot control Europe, the European economy, will soon, if not already, outstrip the U.S. economic power. United Germany alone already has become far more formidable than it was divided.
When Bush took office, he was actively working towards disengaging with Europee, and agreements to pul troops out of Germnay, with the E.U. increasing its economic amd militarey responsibility for NATO demanded by the Bush Administration. The PNAC'ers beleieved that by forcing the E.U. to put a greater part of its domestoc product into the military, it would no longer be able to afford its social safety nets and socialistic leaning government, but this contained the danger of the U.S. losing control over Europes military policy. But after 9/11 and the war in Iraq, they have sytrted to regret letting up the hold on Europes defense, and by brining Russai into the mix, the need for a large amount of new military spending could be reduced. In fact, even if Euriope had to double the percentaqge of GDP given to military purposes, it would simply not have as great an effect on the European ecoom\y as it has on the U.S. economy. Europe simply wastes less of its money, bothas citizens and as nations, on the kind of three ring circus that American waste money on. Because of higher taxes, as a continene the government has far more money than the U.S. and it already has so much of a social safety infrastructiure that it sdoes not cost as much as the U.S. anticipated. PLus the fact that Europe is a more efficcient user of energy., relying on mass transit systems rather than personal transportation that they simply utilize there rsources more efficiently nad effectively than the U.S. Russia is beginning to see the advantages of moving from a freem market system, to the modified. Sicualist CApitalism of Western Europe, as again, it is a more eficient way to bring up the styandard of living of its own people, and even become a source of cheaper labor for Western Europe, while Western Europeans are trained for more technologically advanced jobs. The suporer greed of the rich in America prevcents any such efficiency, and the Governments in Europe far more efectively tax the rich without completely destroying the possiblity of wealth. Thereare millionaires in Europe, just not as many of them and far fewer with obscene amoutns of wealth. Thehigher taxes willcenable Europes to outstrip the U.S. It also provesthat lowe taxes are not necessrily the best way to stimulate economies or expand the middle class or move people out of poverty. Thiose "damned socialists" in Europe with their National Health and their unemploymenyt compensation afor as long as you are unem,ployed, and their retraining an relocating people who have lost their jobs in one field to move into another has done a site better than anything the U.S. has done without lowering taxes consideably. In fact lowering taxes in Europe caused more problems than it fixed.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
