McCain blows it on Russia-Georgia

I am listening to John McCain's press brief about the Russia-Georgia situation. Sorry to say, he gives me only a little more confidence on this issue than his opponent, Barack Obama.

McCain comprehensively described the nature of the Russian bear and the stakes of the conflict. All very fine and well said. And he refused to get sucked into partisan rebuttals of the cheap shots that the Obama campaign has already made at his earlier comments.

But, like retired general and former NATO commander Wesley Clark, interviewed earlier on talk radio, McCain made a fundamental error: thinking that NATO has any teeth. Clark said that NATO should immediately bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO membership. I don't recall McCain saying exactly that, but he came close to it at minimum.

However, NATO doesn't do anything "immediately," especially decisions dripping with irreversible political implications. So even if the European NATO nations were inclined to take the suggestion (which they aren't), it would not happen quickly.

But as I explained here, Russia is acting so far inside NATO's and the EU's decision cycle (the OODA Loop) that NATO/EU will continually be reacting to events that have been superseded. Unless Russia slows down, of course, which is still possible. Putin, Medvedev et al. may yet discover that "starting a war is like entering a dark room blindfolded."

Asked directly whether he would include the use of force to frustrate Russia's plans, McCain replied directly, too: "No." (Clark: "No one is talking about dropping a brigade of the 82d Airborne into Georgia.") That's the right answer, but it also shows why other Allied measures will be ineffectual. At bottom, when resisting naked aggression like this, non-military measures don't work because the other side, Russia, has already made the decision that attaining a military decision is more important than good relations or bearing economic sanctions. Absent a credible threat of meeting their force with our force, then all other responses are empty.

McCain must know this, but he gamely, fluently foundered about sounding tough when there is no way to disguise the fact that our boxing gloves are filled with marshmallows.

And that is exactly why the idea of bringing Georgia into NATO will go nowhere. NATO's members, including the US, simply will not risk Georgia invoking the Charter to demand military opposition to future Russian actions. The plain fact is that we are not going to war over Georgia. We simply will not do it (nor should we, let me be clear).

What about Ukraine, since so many commentators say that it's next in Russia' quest to reconstitute the Soviet empire by another name? Should it be offered NATO membership?

Again, the question of "should" doesn't enter into it. Yes, the heads of NATO's European states understand the consequences of Russian satrapy over Ukraine (well, they probably do), but it's not clear, IMO, they they believe there would be a military threat against western Europe from it, and that puts us back to square one: Will NATO, including the US, be willing to send forces to oppose Soviet forces invading Ukraine?

Again, no. Here's why, in a nutshell.

Europe and the US do not have the money to fight such a war.

Europe and the US do not have the forces to fight such a war.

Europe and the US do not have the will to fight such a war.

Europe does not have the population reserves to fight such a war, although the US does.

Like I said in the earlier post, the balance of power is tipping, and unless Russia's will is much less firm than I think, there pretty much nothing we can do about it.

Update: Stratfor:

By invading Georgia as Russia did (competently if not brilliantly), Putin
re-established the credibility of the Russian army. But far more importantly, by doing this Putin revealed an open secret: While the United States is tied down in the Middle East, American guarantees have no value. This lesson is not for American consumption. It is something that, from the Russian point of view, the Ukrainians, the Balts and the Central Asians need to digest. Indeed, it is a lesson Putin wants to transmit to Poland and the Czech Republic as well. The United States wants to place ballistic missile defense installations in those countries, and the Russians want them to understand that allowing this to happen increases their risk, not their security.

The Russians knew the United States would denounce their attack. This actually plays into Russian hands. The more vocal senior leaders are, the greater the contrast with their inaction, and the Russians wanted to drive home the idea that American guarantees are empty talk.

Quite so.