It may be
surprising but despite many reservations there is a time or two when Mr. Corbyn
says things which I can agree with. He
has indicated in an off the cuff comment that there are questions in his mind
about the NATO alliance and the high flown talk of it "doing
something" about Russia and the Ukraine.
This has been greeted with shock horror in the media.
It is possible
he has asked the basic question that if NATO ought to rattle it's sword against
its shield and bang a drum or two then who is to do it, that is whose army and
with what air support. It may be that
the armchair warriors of the media and politics are thinking of going nuclear
for the hell of it, but let us assume non-nuclear.
The thinking
is that as the EU has pushed further and further east looking for lebensraum
for its administrators and officials, it should now impose its will on the
further shores of the Black Sea and The Crimea.
Ah, The Crimea, we have been there before and that did not end well.
So could the
master German's be at the front of the line?
Perhaps, but by all accounts your German army of the present day is a
lot more Fred Karno than Freikorps. It
is less Prussian Glory
and more Strictly Come Dancing without the timing.
The French,
well not really, Beau Geste is into interior decorating and the Foreign Legion
a lost cause. The Italians? No.
The Spanish? So it has to be the
Brit's, again. Sadly, we are short of
numbers. The enhanced mixed brigade we
might be able to muster might be good enough to get there, although this is
arguable, but not to do anything and probably would need lifts from Ryanair or
Easyjet to return.
As for air
support, the Brit's could manage a day or two, the others even as much as a
week, so long as no opposition was encountered.
If the Russians could put up a few planes and perhaps unlike the EU ones with enough ammo' to make a fight of it,
that would be a write off. As for
logistical support it would be another Iraq and a lot worse.
Mr, Corbyn may
be against any of this purely on principle and there is a good case for thinking
that NATO today is not what it was when I served with the colours just after
Stalin bit the dust. There is a better
case for looking at just what it is and for and perhaps needs radical reform of
purpose, structure, strategy and the other things that have been lost sight of
in our new Europe.
We may not
like Russia, but apart from the literature, music, opera and ballet etc. we
never have and there is a long tradition of opposing Russian empires. How many men were lost up the Khyber because
we feared them moving into India?
But if we or
the EU tell us to go out there and do our duty we should question whether it is
a duty, or whether, like Bismarck, we should put Realpolitik first.
If you would
like another tune, go to Youtube and take your pick of the choices of the 1812
Overture by Tchaikovsky.
But don't
forget to duck when the cannon's fire.
Disabled toilet.
ReplyDelete"more Strictly Come Dancing without the timing."
ReplyDeleteHa ha - good analogy. Maybe Corbyn is sometimes right on the stopped clock principle.
My question would be WTF is the EU doing in the Ukraine in the first place? The Russians don't trust the EU, and rightly so, because they remember Hitler and Napoleon. The Crimea and Donetsk regions democratically seceded from rest of the Ukraine largely over internal sovereignty issues. The Ukraine at the time (and probably still is) bedevilled with corrupt politicians skimming the Gas and pipeline revenues. So why should the EU and NATO be involved?
ReplyDelete