Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Read Marek's comment again.
(NATO's triple purpose: Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.)

The reason the EU can't replace the NATO is exactly the point that people in eastern Europe fear a dominance of Germany, if the biggest ally in their military alliance would be Germany.

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers

by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Thu Feb 26th, 2009 at 11:40:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Polish nationalists could react to good EU-Russia relations by raising the spectre of the Partition of Poland (among Germany, Austria-Hungary and Russia) to great effect.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Feb 26th, 2009 at 11:45:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Molotov-Ribbentrop might be more relevant in living memory. Yalta even more so.

I doubt anyone in Poland seriously considers partition a possibility. But a certain lack of consistency from the Allies during WWII might still rankle among those old enough to remember the aftermath.

Not that the UK and US were ever likely to declare war on Russia immediately after. It was considered as an option, but rejected for obvious reasons.

But there's a case to be made for mismanagement of the invasion in 1944, which added another 6-12 months to the war and allowed the Soviet incursion into Europe to push far to the West of where it might have reached otherwise.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Feb 26th, 2009 at 01:17:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series