Date: Fri, 2 Apr 99 12:50:11 EST
From: "Brian J. Callahan" <Brian=J.=Callahan%MT%DFCI-AT-EYE.DFCI.HARVARD.EDU>
Subject: re: NATO is boxed in...


Carp muses:
>Yeah, yeah, yeah: I know we'd *like* to have a stateless wirld but we
>don't, so let's talk realpolitik.  Will anybody be safer in a post
>NATO-type wirld?                           

>Except for the Serbs?

Okay, Dr. Karpissinger, realpolitik it is.  If NATO "wins" and effectively 
controls a small chunk of the Balkans, every party to ethnic conflicts in the 
region will inevitably line up on a pro- or anti- NATO side, with Russia and 
China helping the antis.  They'll see NATO as an expanding empire which 
therefore threatens their interersts.  Let us consider then the safety of one 
group not even in the Balkans: the civilian populations of the NATO countries 
(admittedly, self-interest plays a part in sigling out this group, but this 
is an exercise in realpolitik, so that seems appropriate).  Are they safer 
with a Russia and China, two nations with many nuclear weapons that can reach 
all of the group in question, who fear an expanding empire or not?  I'd say 
they (we) would be much safer without NATO than with an expanding NATO.  
Expansion and war also help to divert the population from keeping an eye on 
their most immediate enemies, State and Capital.  Hey, there's a war on, ya 
know...