Jeffrey Sachs in FT

04. März 2022

Publi­shing date 21.02.2022

Biden and the US for­eign poli­cy estab­lish­ment has so far refu­sed to recon­si­der Nato enlar­ge­ment for three rea­sons. First, they fear the char­ge of appease­ment. Second, the US wants the pre­ro­ga­ti­ve to puts its mili­ta­ry in any coun­try that will have it, even if that dis­re­gards the legi­ti­ma­te secu­ri­ty con­cerns of neigh­bou­ring sta­tes. Third, the US for­eign poli­cy estab­lish­ment has long fai­led to ack­now­ledge valid Rus­si­an secu­ri­ty con­cerns that go back to the second world war and even earlier.

Rus­sia has long fea­red inva­si­ons from the west, whe­ther by Napo­le­on, Hit­ler or lat­ter­ly Nato. For this rea­son, coo­ler and wiser US for­eign poli­cy stra­te­gists, inclu­ding Bill Clinton’s defence secreta­ry Wil­liam Per­ry, the gre­at sta­tes­man and diplo­mat Geor­ge Kennan and for­mer ambassa­dor to the Soviet Uni­on, Jack Mat­lock, argued that Nato enlar­ge­ment to the east after the demi­se of the USSR was unne­cessa­ry, reck­less and provocative.

If war comes, Putin would of cour­se deser­ve the bla­me and glo­bal opp­ro­bri­um. Russia’s thre­ats are thug­gish and dan­ge­rous. Yet as mis­gui­ded as the Rus­si­an actions are, Ame­ri­can intran­si­gence regar­ding Nato enlar­ge­ment is also utter­ly mis­gui­ded and ris­ky. True friends of Ukrai­ne, and of glo­bal peace, should be cal­ling for a US and Nato com­pro­mi­se with Rus­sia — one that respects Russia’s legi­ti­ma­te secu­ri­ty inte­rests while ful­ly backing Ukraine’s sovereignty.

src: click

Hinterlasse eine Antwort