You think he's stupid enough to invade a NATO country? I mean, the whole reason the Baltics are in NATO is because the FP establishment wanted to goad Russia (for whom I have NO love) into a new war, cold or otherwise.
I was saying that mostly in jest. However, I think most people in power don't trust Putin. I've been afraid that since the opposition leader who lost the Belarusian "election" fled to Lithuania, and with the Union State between Russia and Belarus, that the protests in Belarus might prompt Lukashenko to get into some kind of military skirmish with Lithuania, opening the gate to Russian intervention. But there are lots of things that keep me awake at night.
If I didn't know much about Putin, this, by itself, would lead me instinctively to give the guy a chance. Maybe we can aid a coup there, like we did in Ukraine, with Diamond Joe at the helm. Nazis optional this time.
My brother and his wife seem to enjoy it so far. They're teachers who have been teaching overseas for years. They've taught in China, Oman, and Japan before moving to Latvia. So far they've found it very welcoming, and they really like the hiking and nature.
Oman? That's a place I'd love to see more of, but probably will never get the chance. Super cool landscape in the north, where I was for a few hours (both sadly because I'd have liked to have seen more, and comically because we weren't supposed to have been there anywhere near as long as we were).
So many thing to unpack from this one little statement. So many questions. So many mental images. If it were someone other than KG I would simply say.. WTF? If it weren't for it being KG, I would call BS. I could also write a million sarcastic responses and the jokes would write themselves. HMM???
That's one interpretation. The Baltics are also members of the EU and joined both in 2004. When they gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, they explicitly chose not to participate in the Commonwealth of Independent States and sought closer ties with Western Europe from the get-go. The Baltics, as well as many of the former members of the Warsaw Pact and Comecon sought to integrate with Western Europe starting pretty much as soon as the Soviet Union collapsed. The Baltics joining both organizations in 2004 was the culmination of a process that had begun a decade before. One could say it was not an effort to goad Russia into war and more taking advantage of a window of opportunity of a weakened Russia in order to integrate more European states into an economic and security system with the hope of limiting further conflicts in Europe. At the time negotiations began, the ethnic strife in the Former Yugoslavia and the Caucasus were a real problem and there were countless irredentist claims by various ethnic groups in Eastern Europe. In 2004, the US and NATO were in the thick of things in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you honestly believe that bringing the Baltics into NATO was about goading Russia into a new war? And of course while these negotiations were going on, Russia was actively involved in dealing with unrest in Chechnya and Dagestan, as well as being involved in strife in the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Were they really in a position to object?
My parents took my son with them for a Christmas visit. The pictures were amazing. My brother and his wife really enjoyed it there.
I'm well aware of this. I'm also aware of the assurances given by the 1st Bush Administration that NATO would not move "one inch" farther east. While I certainly understand the suspicion that (especially) the Baltics and Poland harbored toward Russia, being the son of a Latvian whose family fled after the illegal annexation, I also understand the interests of a humiliated and weakened former empire. And how has that limiting further conflicts bit gone? I mean, tanks haven't crossed the Fulda Gap, sure. I'm pretty sure the Balkans (who were Non-Aligned, anyway) and the states of the Caucasus and Ukraine are wondering how it all worked out. Was it to goad them into a shooting war? No. Not at that time, or in that place, necessarily. But the accession into NATO in particular and the coups in Ukraine most especially thoroughly narrowed the margin of error, which suits Cold Warriors, who basically still run the foreign policy establishment, just fine. As we've seen to alarming effect since some random year in the past half-decade. A large segment of our elites can't seem to do without The Old Enemy. I guess a different question is: why is it cool for us to use them as pawns this time? They've been pawns for a few hundred years, between the Swedes, the Poles, the Germans, and the Rus.
The word "Mars" comes to mind when in the north. But in the super-cool geology sense of the word, not the "cold, lifeless, oxygenless planet sense". The few people I interacted with in that very short time were some of the friendliest I've ever encountered. The Bedouin roots still run deep.
If the Baltics are being used as pawns, at the least we have to say that they're very willing pawns. They intentionally switched sides, and are counting on NATO (ie the US) to keep their promises. Today we would. Three months from now it's debatable. They're not stupid, they've been hung out to dry before and aren't likely to completely trust anybody. But facing Russia alone ends only one way and everybody knows sit. There's a chance - hardly a sure thing but a chance - that when push comes to shove the West will be in their corner. S lim chance is better than no chance at all. The mention of the Fulda Gap makes me think of my brother who, to avoid carrying an M16 in a rice paddy while Charlie took pot shots at his ass, parlayed his musical talent into a spot in the 84th Army band. (And at the time, you had to be really good to get a chair). Unfortunately, the 84th Army band was attached to an armored division which was stationed in the Fulda Gap. As he said, when 3 or 4 Soviet armored columns come slamming through the gap on the way tp Paris, he's going to be standing there with a G flat baritone in his hand.
Dude. Then NEVER "switched sides". They were completely unwilling participants in the USSR. They were forced at the point of a spear to "join". They revolted periodically, and sparked by The Singing Revolution in Estonia, were the first to re-declare their independence.
No, I get that. I'm not Gerald Ford. But notwithstanding that they got into the Russian sphere via T34's pouring across the border, that's where they were for a very long time. Now they're cozy with NATO and hope that keeps their former "friends" on the other side of the line. We all hope so too.
I really do get that. I'm only one person removed from actually experiencing that very thing. But this is not the Soviet Union of 1940 we're talking about here.
Only because they're not sure they could get away with it. The scary thing is that they have the same goals only without the veneer of ideology, all that workers unite, dictatorship of the proletariat,, throw off the capitalist yoke blather. And when you remove that all you have is naked greed.
More of that around than most folks would guess. One of my hobby buddies is Estonian. Somehow he and his folks got out. And then there's the mother of Mrs KG's boss--who was East Prussian (the father of my host family in HS too). Russia now? Many still see themselves as the power they once were--which was pretty imperialistic for a so called socialist state.
One clue to Russia I was given many years ago by a teacher--their need for a warm water port. That's a big, unspoken reason for the Crimean takeover and explains to some extent why they are touchy about Koenigsberg/Kaliningrad.
Sevastopol was THE reason for their Crimean takeover. It was mentioned in nearly every news story I read on the topic.