Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
Financial Times
April 1, 2008 By Hugh Williamson, Berlin
Leaders of Nato were seeking a face-saving compromise on Monday night over the organisation’s possible enlargement after Germany insisted it was “not the right time” to allow Ukraine and Georgia to take a significant step towards membership.
As Nato prepares to convene for its annual summit in Bucharest on Wednesday, Angela Merkel’s government made clear that it would veto a US drive to allow both former Soviet republics to join the defence alliance’s membership action plan (Map).
As a result, Nato must now find a formula in its summit communiqué that does not embarrass Georgia and Ukraine but that also avoids angering Russia, which has made clear that it is opposed to Map being offered to the two states.
Germany’s insistence on blocking Map status now means the 26-member alliance will be engaged in some tricky diplomacy at Bucharest. In an interview with the FT this week, Mikheil Saakashvili, Georgia’s president, said that he would not accept any of the numerous compromises being drafted: “Anything that is not Map is a great Russian victory.”
Ms Merkel’s spokesman said internal factors – political unrest in Georgia and divisions over Nato membership in Ukraine – meant they were “not yet ripe” to gain Map status, the final step before becoming an alliance member.
Russia’s “legitimate security concerns” regarding Nato’s possible eastward enlargement must be considered by the alliance. He rejected suggestions by Georgia, Estonia and others that denial of Map status would amount to giving Russia a huge say in Nato’s internal affairs. “There is certainly no Russian veto.”
Germany has previously signalled its concerns over Georgia and Ukraine winning Map status, but this is the first time Berlin has explicitly ruled out backing the two countries this week.
Ms Merkel had discussed her position with US President George W. Bush, but had not changed her stance in spite of his opposing view. “Mr Bush knows our position,” the spokesman said.
Among the European Union’s larger member states, Germany has been most willing in recent years to take into account Russia’s security worries. German officials were sceptical on Monday about the US view that Nato membership for Georgia and Ukraine would help bring stability and added security to the region.
“We have to weigh up how much security we will win and how much we will lose,” one person familiar with Berlin’s stance said. Berlin fears that a deal on Map status would lead to Russia being less willing to find accords with the US and Nato on key missile defence and disarmament issues.
Compromises could include the upgrading of a Nato commission on Ukraine into a Nato-Ukraine council to meet in Ukraine, according to German officials.
Germany opposes Georgia’s Map application both because of problems surrounding the country’s two disputed territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and because of the repression of opposition movements.
In the case of Ukraine, Germany did not see the cross-party or public support for Nato membership Berlin believed was necessary.
April 1, 2008 By Hugh Williamson, Berlin
Leaders of Nato were seeking a face-saving compromise on Monday night over the organisation’s possible enlargement after Germany insisted it was “not the right time” to allow Ukraine and Georgia to take a significant step towards membership.
As Nato prepares to convene for its annual summit in Bucharest on Wednesday, Angela Merkel’s government made clear that it would veto a US drive to allow both former Soviet republics to join the defence alliance’s membership action plan (Map).
As a result, Nato must now find a formula in its summit communiqué that does not embarrass Georgia and Ukraine but that also avoids angering Russia, which has made clear that it is opposed to Map being offered to the two states.
Germany’s insistence on blocking Map status now means the 26-member alliance will be engaged in some tricky diplomacy at Bucharest. In an interview with the FT this week, Mikheil Saakashvili, Georgia’s president, said that he would not accept any of the numerous compromises being drafted: “Anything that is not Map is a great Russian victory.”
Ms Merkel’s spokesman said internal factors – political unrest in Georgia and divisions over Nato membership in Ukraine – meant they were “not yet ripe” to gain Map status, the final step before becoming an alliance member.
Russia’s “legitimate security concerns” regarding Nato’s possible eastward enlargement must be considered by the alliance. He rejected suggestions by Georgia, Estonia and others that denial of Map status would amount to giving Russia a huge say in Nato’s internal affairs. “There is certainly no Russian veto.”
Germany has previously signalled its concerns over Georgia and Ukraine winning Map status, but this is the first time Berlin has explicitly ruled out backing the two countries this week.
Ms Merkel had discussed her position with US President George W. Bush, but had not changed her stance in spite of his opposing view. “Mr Bush knows our position,” the spokesman said.
Among the European Union’s larger member states, Germany has been most willing in recent years to take into account Russia’s security worries. German officials were sceptical on Monday about the US view that Nato membership for Georgia and Ukraine would help bring stability and added security to the region.
“We have to weigh up how much security we will win and how much we will lose,” one person familiar with Berlin’s stance said. Berlin fears that a deal on Map status would lead to Russia being less willing to find accords with the US and Nato on key missile defence and disarmament issues.
Compromises could include the upgrading of a Nato commission on Ukraine into a Nato-Ukraine council to meet in Ukraine, according to German officials.
Germany opposes Georgia’s Map application both because of problems surrounding the country’s two disputed territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and because of the repression of opposition movements.
In the case of Ukraine, Germany did not see the cross-party or public support for Nato membership Berlin believed was necessary.