Tomasky's hypothetical was Georgia gaining entry in NATO and then going to war with Russia. Methinks that's quite large a hypothetical: the war calculations would be radically altered, on both sides.
And you know, given his peculiar decision-making process last August, I'm not convinced that Saak would have conferred with NATO, had Georgia then been a member, before launching an attack on South Ossetia. Even despite not having the protection of NATO, he nevertheless seemed to assume that his Western allies would support him more explicitly then they did. And they did support him up to but not including our troops on the ground. So I'm not convinced NATO membership would have necessarily deterred him, unless there was something in the contract stating that Georgia's membership would be contingent upon not starting fights with Russia. Secondly, so far as Georgian NATO membership could have been a deterrent to Russia's response, well, yet, it might have. OTOH, it could also have been the last straw. People think Russia is on a hair-trigger alert now. Russia thinks it is being restrained and playing nice now. They were happy to teach Georgia a lesson. And they're eager to prove they can teach us things too. Why go there? "Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.
