8 ms·

I don't buy the idea that it was a mistake for NATO to allow former Soviet bloc countries to join, because it would supposedly encroach on Russia's sphere of in

I don't buy the idea that it was a mistake for NATO to allow former Soviet bloc countries to join, because it would supposedly encroach on Russia's sphere of influence or increase tensions with Russia. Spheres of influence are gained through economic muscle and cultural power now, not force of arms.

User23 4y ago
> Spheres of influence are gained through economic muscle and cultural power now, not force of arms. Amusingly, that status quo is enforced via the USA’s supposed overwhelming force of arms. Which in turn suggests your analysis is deeply deficient in its consideration of higher order effects.
- watwut 4y ago
  Ukraine is asking for those guns ... and one of many reason is that being under Russian leadership means becoming poorer and poorer.
- red-iron-pine 4y ago
  Which, apparently, matter. See also: Georgia, Armenia vs. Azerbaijan, Belorussian & Kazakh internal protests and revolts, or Ukraine c. 2014. Russian arms have been used on or by all of those countries. In the case of Armenia, support meant they kicked he shit out of the Azeris before... and not the case now, where Russian can't or won't help them, but the Turks are backing the Azeris. Force of arms has made a big difference for all of the states around Russia. And not necessarily in a good way.
morkalork 4y ago
Reading about what the Soviet Union did in countries like Estonia and Ukraine is pretty harrowing stuff. Wanting to join NATO for protection after is completely understandable and denying them because it would upset their former (and present) abuser is a shameful thought.
- gambiting 4y ago
  Everything that Russia is doing now it has done to countries like Poland in the past. That's why when we see news about Russia shipping Ukrainian kids to Russia to be "integrated" it makes our blood literally boil - it was the fate of many Polish families as well, my own relatives have stories of their loved ones having to walk back from Syberia after being sent there for "integration".
  - 908B64B197 4y ago
    To me, one of the greatest feat of the EU and NATO is the integration of countries like Poland and Romania to the west. These two countries were economically and socially stunted by decades of communist mismanagement, failed socialism and outright theft and genocide from Russia. It's been truly incredible to see them grow and prosper.
    - coffeebeqn 4y ago
      And hopefully soon Ukraine
      - 908B64B197 4y ago
        Ukraine is going to be an incredible opportunity for the west in the coming decades. Young, educated, motivated population with western values and a strong will for democracy and freedom. An economy that can only grow and prosper. And unlike Syrian and Afghan "refugees", there's a strong desire from Ukrainian refugees to return and rebuild.
        throwaway2037 4y ago
        Real question: Why did you write Syrian and Afghan refugees with double quotes? In English slang, this is used to imply so-called status -- lesser or fake. Their countries were destroyed by war, and they again have repressive dictatorships. Their need to escape to a safer places seems real to me. Also, if Syria or Afghanistan graduated to democratic, free countries, I am sure many, many refugees would want to return home for cultural reasons.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mantas 4y ago
It is secured through force of arms though. As a Lithuanian... If we weren't in NATO, we'd either have a very very serious problems now. Or be a vassal state like Belarus.
coffeebeqn 4y ago
It is a voluntary alliance. Countries apply to join. They’re not coerced. Small countries will and sovereignty also matters.
- TheCoelacanth 4y ago
  Russia perceives small countries bordering them having sovereignty as an encroachment on its territory. Don't they realize that they are supposed to be Russian puppet states?
  - koonsolo 4y ago
    If Russia would play nice, maybe the countries around them wouldn't mind having win-win deals with them. But somehow Russia thinks master-slave relationships are better.
jen20 4y ago
No-one who has visited the Baltics (specifically Lithuania, my experience in the others is less extensive and less recent) could argue with a straight face that they were better off remaining under a Russian sphere of influence than as part of the European Union and the western world at large.
foverzar 4y ago
> I don't buy the idea that it was a mistake for NATO to allow former Soviet bloc countries to join, because it would supposedly encroach on Russia's sphere of influence or increase tensions with Russia It was a mistake for NATO to do it without Russia. It's not a matter of "influence", but a matter of military risks and perceived threats. If there was a political will towards pushing Russia to NATO any similar to what has been going on with Georgia or Ukraine, we'd be living in a different world. But now (really far more than a decade already) Russia is alienated from NATO, perceives it as a threat and a bad actor. And people will be making all kinds of moralistic arguments, but point is that all of this is a consequence of geopolitical natural laws. Fact is, politicians and leaders were clearly aware of those laws and all the cause-effects and general outcomes, but nevertheless had stirred the world towards it.
- koonsolo 4y ago
  Dictators don't like united democracies. Strange.
  - athrowaw 4y ago
    Should we allow dictatorships because any country should have a sovereignty?
  - foverzar 4y ago
    Totally strange given that love to democracies have nothing to do with anything. Srsly, how do the "United democracies" expect to be taken seriously when their whole attitude to literally everything is "bad guys don't like us for being good boys"?
    - tim333 4y ago
      NATO seems to get taken quite seriously by its opponents for some strange reason.
      - koonsolo 4y ago
        Exactly, and in the end that's the only thing that matters: power. We in the western world can be very happy that democracies represent the biggest power. Anyone who doesn't agree is free to emigrate or happily live in a dictatorship of course.
mannerheim 4y ago
The question of whether or not it was a mistake misses that NATO expansion was likely inevitable because of the democratic process. Poland and other CEE countries lobbied aggressively to join NATO in the 90s, and by far their biggest asset was their diaspora communities in the US. The GOP had taken the House in '94 and were pushing for NATO expansion leading up to the '96 election. In order to head off this threat, Clinton promised NATO expansion eventually, to which Dole ended up promising a definite date for CEE's entry. Said Clinton at the time: 'I face a difficult campaign, but I have a reasonable chance. The Republicans are pushing NATO expansion. Wisconsin, Illinois and Ohio are key; they represented a big part of my majority last time—states where I won by a narrow margin. The Republicans think they can take away those states by playing on the idea of NATO expansion.' https://www.russiamatters.org/blog/how-much-did-us-elections-factor-post-cold-war-nato-expansion https://www.russiamatters.org/blog/how-much-did-us-elections...

User23 4y ago

> Spheres of influence are gained through economic muscle and cultural power now, not force of arms. Amusingly, that status quo is enforced via the USA’s supposed overwhelming force of arms. Which in turn suggests your analysis is deeply deficient in its consideration of higher order effects.

watwut 4y ago
Ukraine is asking for those guns ... and one of many reason is that being under Russian leadership means becoming poorer and poorer.
red-iron-pine 4y ago
Which, apparently, matter. See also: Georgia, Armenia vs. Azerbaijan, Belorussian & Kazakh internal protests and revolts, or Ukraine c. 2014. Russian arms have been used on or by all of those countries. In the case of Armenia, support meant they kicked he shit out of the Azeris before... and not the case now, where Russian can't or won't help them, but the Turks are backing the Azeris. Force of arms has made a big difference for all of the states around Russia. And not necessarily in a good way.

morkalork 4y ago

Reading about what the Soviet Union did in countries like Estonia and Ukraine is pretty harrowing stuff. Wanting to join NATO for protection after is completely understandable and denying them because it would upset their former (and present) abuser is a shameful thought.

gambiting 4y ago
Everything that Russia is doing now it has done to countries like Poland in the past. That's why when we see news about Russia shipping Ukrainian kids to Russia to be "integrated" it makes our blood literally boil - it was the fate of many Polish families as well, my own relatives have stories of their loved ones having to walk back from Syberia after being sent there for "integration".
- 908B64B197 4y ago
  To me, one of the greatest feat of the EU and NATO is the integration of countries like Poland and Romania to the west. These two countries were economically and socially stunted by decades of communist mismanagement, failed socialism and outright theft and genocide from Russia. It's been truly incredible to see them grow and prosper.
  - coffeebeqn 4y ago
    And hopefully soon Ukraine
    - 908B64B197 4y ago
      Ukraine is going to be an incredible opportunity for the west in the coming decades. Young, educated, motivated population with western values and a strong will for democracy and freedom. An economy that can only grow and prosper. And unlike Syrian and Afghan "refugees", there's a strong desire from Ukrainian refugees to return and rebuild.
      - throwaway2037 4y ago
        Real question: Why did you write Syrian and Afghan refugees with double quotes? In English slang, this is used to imply so-called status -- lesser or fake. Their countries were destroyed by war, and they again have repressive dictatorships. Their need to escape to a safer places seems real to me. Also, if Syria or Afghanistan graduated to democratic, free countries, I am sure many, many refugees would want to return home for cultural reasons.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

mantas 4y ago

It is secured through force of arms though. As a Lithuanian... If we weren't in NATO, we'd either have a very very serious problems now. Or be a vassal state like Belarus.

coffeebeqn 4y ago

It is a voluntary alliance. Countries apply to join. They’re not coerced. Small countries will and sovereignty also matters.

TheCoelacanth 4y ago
Russia perceives small countries bordering them having sovereignty as an encroachment on its territory. Don't they realize that they are supposed to be Russian puppet states?
- koonsolo 4y ago
  If Russia would play nice, maybe the countries around them wouldn't mind having win-win deals with them. But somehow Russia thinks master-slave relationships are better.

jen20 4y ago

No-one who has visited the Baltics (specifically Lithuania, my experience in the others is less extensive and less recent) could argue with a straight face that they were better off remaining under a Russian sphere of influence than as part of the European Union and the western world at large.

foverzar 4y ago

> I don't buy the idea that it was a mistake for NATO to allow former Soviet bloc countries to join, because it would supposedly encroach on Russia's sphere of influence or increase tensions with Russia It was a mistake for NATO to do it without Russia. It's not a matter of "influence", but a matter of military risks and perceived threats. If there was a political will towards pushing Russia to NATO any similar to what has been going on with Georgia or Ukraine, we'd be living in a different world. But now (really far more than a decade already) Russia is alienated from NATO, perceives it as a threat and a bad actor. And people will be making all kinds of moralistic arguments, but point is that all of this is a consequence of geopolitical natural laws. Fact is, politicians and leaders were clearly aware of those laws and all the cause-effects and general outcomes, but nevertheless had stirred the world towards it.

koonsolo 4y ago
Dictators don't like united democracies. Strange.
- athrowaw 4y ago
  Should we allow dictatorships because any country should have a sovereignty?
- foverzar 4y ago
  Totally strange given that love to democracies have nothing to do with anything. Srsly, how do the "United democracies" expect to be taken seriously when their whole attitude to literally everything is "bad guys don't like us for being good boys"?
  - tim333 4y ago
    NATO seems to get taken quite seriously by its opponents for some strange reason.
    - koonsolo 4y ago
      Exactly, and in the end that's the only thing that matters: power. We in the western world can be very happy that democracies represent the biggest power. Anyone who doesn't agree is free to emigrate or happily live in a dictatorship of course.

mannerheim 4y ago

The question of whether or not it was a mistake misses that NATO expansion was likely inevitable because of the democratic process. Poland and other CEE countries lobbied aggressively to join NATO in the 90s, and by far their biggest asset was their diaspora communities in the US. The GOP had taken the House in '94 and were pushing for NATO expansion leading up to the '96 election. In order to head off this threat, Clinton promised NATO expansion eventually, to which Dole ended up promising a definite date for CEE's entry. Said Clinton at the time: 'I face a difficult campaign, but I have a reasonable chance. The Republicans are pushing NATO expansion. Wisconsin, Illinois and Ohio are key; they represented a big part of my majority last time—states where I won by a narrow margin. The Republicans think they can take away those states by playing on the idea of NATO expansion.' https://www.russiamatters.org/blog/how-much-did-us-elections-factor-post-cold-war-nato-expansion https://www.russiamatters.org/blog/how-much-did-us-elections...