So what gives? We have an American Ally, being groomed for NATO membership, at war with Russia. Russia and the USA of course still retain the ability to annihilate humanity if they got sucked into a total war. And nobody is freaking; the olypics carryon serenely, the UNSC isn’t in session recalled; the duct tape remain on the shelves.
And of course this is an entirely rational response. What was entirely irrational was the schemes to expand NATO right up onto the Russian border. The much commented-on discussion between Fukuyama and Kagan included some revealing exchanges that shed much light on this. Fukuyama tried to explain the absurdity of the current US position of demanding to have everything from Russia: accepting missile defence in eastern Europe, NATO expansion (while excluding Russia), that Russia sabotage their lucrative relationship with Iran, accepting the NATO settlement on Kosovo, return to internal democratisation, be nice to their West-facing neighbours, and, no doubt the moon on a stick. Kagan resisted but later on made a revealing comment: that the the hubris didn’t start in 2001, but the Clinton administration (or, I would say, Bush I). Right! The neocons could not have been so successful in pushing their agenda, and remain so influential, if they weren’t pushing at an open door. To some extent we have all become neocons and they are really a pathological examples of a much wider movement based on hubris and delusion: how else to explain HR362 and the absurd Iran policies.
What we are seeing now is a tragic ‘correction’ where the Russians and the Georgians are exposing our priorities for us.