Wanted: a European Position

The New York Times has an analysis of the “European dilemma” in dealing with the situation in Georgia:

PARIS — As NATO foreign ministers gather Tuesday for an emergency meeting on the Georgian crisis, Europe is divided over how to balance its ties to Russia with concerns over the country’s new aggressiveness.

The European dilemma is clear, said Clifford Kupchan, a director of the Eurasia Group, a consulting firm in Washington. “How do they square their increasing energy dependence on Russia with their increasing political discomfort with Putin?” he said, referring to Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin. “It’s a very hard circle to square.”

In a similar vein World Meets.us has an article from the Financial Times Deutschland whose thesis is that it’s Europe that needs mediation:

Already, at the beginning of negotiations to find a solution to the Georgia conflict, it’s obvious that there is more going on here than just differing interpretations of history. Europe wants to mediate, but it’s so divided itself, that it too, requires mediation. The controversy directly influences the proposals for a solution to the conflict. The views of Poland and the Baltic states are backed up by Britain and Russia-skeptic Sweden – in their view that Moscow is the aggressor.

According to the declarations of this group, international peacekeepers should be stationed in the breakaway regions of Georgia. In Paris and Berlin, however, one prefers to speak of “observers.”

The debate within NATO is even sharper. The Eastern Europeans are using this latest war as an argument that Georgia should be admitted to the alliance as quickly as possible. In the West, one reaches the opposite conclusion.

A good start might be a German position on the subject. It’s a little hard for me to reconcile this statement:

This is not Europe’s fight, said Stefan Kornelius, foreign editor and columnist for the newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung. “I don’t see Europe prepared to go to war with itself over Georgia,” he said. “The European foreign ministers sense this is too big for them and they will in the end align themselves with the United States, while trying to affect policy.”

With this statement from German Prime Minister Angela Merkel:

Nevertheless, during her Sunday visit to Tbilisi, Merkel repeated her claim that eventually Georgia would become a member of NATO. Speaking at a press conference she said “Georgia will become a member of NATO if it wants to — and it does want to.”

and this statement from the German Foreign Minister in early 2007:

“Of course, it is in the interest of NATO and NATO members that new NATO members do not bring their conflicts into the alliance along with them,” Steinmeier, whose country holds the rotating EU Presidency, said at a news conference in Tbilisi.

“On the other hand, it doesn’t mean we should view the lack of a resolution as an obstacle to accession,” he added. “If we [view it as an obstacle], then we will enable third parties to drag out the rapprochement process endlessly.”

Perhaps it’s not Europe’s fight but in that case I don’t see that it’s in our best interests to get overly exercised about a Russian muscle-flexing that the Europeans more affected by it than we aren’t concerned about themselves.