Papa was barely six ears old when NATO was established. By the time I became aware of the world beyond the confines of my childhood, the protection of NATO made perfect sesne to me. Throughout the 1950’s the threat from the Soviet Union was a given. Communisim, with its inevitable dictatorships, was a clear danger. Memories of the horrors of World War Two were still vivid. A strong alliance against Soviet aggresion made perfect sense. A Cold War was real. When the Soviwt Union collapsed under its lumbering ineffecvtiveness a sigh of relief was the reaction.
The 1990’s didn’t pay much attention to European security as it might impact that of the United States. At times it seems as if the country has a need to lapse into a fondness for politicians that are weak on national defense. It could be reasnably argued that the fall of the Soviet Union was the time to nurture freedom in Russia. Other countries in Eastern Europe got the idea and flourished to some extent. Not much thought or attention seemed to be paid to who would and how Russia was to be led. There of course was a certain opening of cultural and business exchanges but that was mostly layered over a chaotic and corrupt government. The dream of peace in Europe began to fade. Enter Vlad Putin with the age old Mother Russia mentality. He also was equipped with tons of cannon fodder to cause heartburn on the continent.
During another 8 years of peace through placation in America, Putin made his initial move in Ukraine. Crimea was captured. After another wait in US administrations the whole of Ukraine was invaded. War in Europe again. Hard to believe. I know three of you rascals just returned from a vacation there with your parents. That is a wonderful experience. Good for you. There is a lot of cultural history to absorb. I think I wrote near the start of these musings Papa was struck by the contrast between the splendor of castles, manors and palaces and the presumed broken backs of laborers. Conceived grandeur by what I like to call Poobahs. A strange system of divine right to rule invariably prone to intrigue, conflict and changing borders was the norm. As a history major it was always difficult to keep track of all the European wars. Now, thirty years after the threat of communist expansion seemed gone Russia is back on the doorstep.
America’s revolution and ensuing westward expansion was forged by rugged individualism and an unhealthy dose of violence but no anointed Poobahs. Our most costly war nearly tore the country apart and there have been more than enough ups and downs internally to test the foundations. In Europe skirmishes and wars continued until the Great War which the US eventually entered. Afterwards, isolationist instincts took root in our country. The Second World War was viewed as more necessary. Isolation didn’t take a strong hold afterwards. NATO was created in an atmosphere that oceans could no longer protect us and that American active involvement/leadership was the best path for not being dragged into Europe’s conflicts. Some will argue that the crux of NATO is American force. Europe rebuilt and prospered under our military safety umbrella. They were living as if no danger to them existed after the fall of the Soviets. As stated above perhaps that was the time to ward off the rise of danger in the remnants that didn’t require big military investments by Europeans. With Ukraine smoldering it might finally be time to address strong militaries in Europe. I’m not holding my breath for most countries.
Enter American politics. Trump goes off script and wonders aloud why Europe isn’t meeting defined NATO financial goals. Democrats and many Europeans react with shock that those closest to Russia/danger should be questioned about being responsible for self defense; or possibly self-preservation. It is a treaty after all. If only American force deters then is it not logical Europe might want to lessen US influence over decisions that, at least preliminarily, impact their continent’s existence? From our side of the Atlantic it may not be outrageous to expect treaty partners to step to the plate and give a fair share. Unless the requestor is named Trump. This or a variation of the theme will be a part of 2024’s election cycle. While it might be nice that all NATO partners contribute per agreement I still have more regard for a partner that is not fickle, indecisive and de- escalating at all cost. I don’t like war. The big dog currently in NATO not doing well on those fundamentals.