With the exception of a couple of regular columns I enjoy, I don’t usually make it a point to read the opinion sections in Korea’s English-language dailies, but if I’m sitting in the john and I have a copy of the Times or Herald handy, I’ll give ‘em a read.
Helps the bowel movements, you know.
Anyway, was looking at the Herald today when I came across this atrocious column by Russia in Global Politics editorial board chairman Sergei Karaganov on the geopolitical foolishness of admitting Ukraine to NATO. What really got my attention, however, was this line:
Of course, Russia is not Serbia. It will survive NATO’s further enlargement, although it will be weakened temporarily and pushed into anti-Western alliances. Many Russian officials will lose patience with Russia’s remaining a status-quo power, and one hopes that they will not seek confrontation.
Immeasurably larger damage will be done to Ukraine: it will lose a vital partner, one that perhaps has not always been ideal, but that nonetheless has never inflicted any damage and has never allied with other countries against it.
No damage, indeed.
You can stick this in the “Why I have trouble calling the Japanese to account” file while you’re at it.
3 Comments
Isn’t this: “it will be weakened temporarily and pushed into anti-Western alliances” about as offensive? It’s not even a veiled threat.
Also in the “not-so-veiled threat” department is the talk about Ukraine’s borders. I mean, he goes out and basically says Ukraine’s borderns aren’t worth the maps their drawn on, and then he wonders why it is that the Ukrainians might want to join NATO. I’m not one for unnnecessarily making enemies out of the Russians, but certainly their are better arguments than the ones offered in that piece.
Last time Russia and Germany played with their neighbours’ borders, Poland got displaced a few hundred miles, a few million people died, and Finland loast a slice, too… Of course joining a military alliance has nothing to do with this, eh?
Sigh…