Even if no one can accurately define what governments are for, they are all but impossible to undo once they have been established. Consider NATO. Its purpose was quite clear during the Cold War, but it doesn’t really have one now. In that regard, Ukraine’s request to join NATO is thoughtfully clarifying. Before Ukraine can join NATO, its war with Russia must come to an end, according to President Biden in an interview that was broadcast on Sunday.
Biden said there is no consensus within NATO on when to permit Ukraine to join the military alliance during a taped conversation with CNN. Biden also pointed out some shortcomings, like as a lack of democratization, in Ukraine’s eligibility.
According to Biden,” In order for Ukraine to be eligible to join NATO, we need to lay out a logical path.” NATO’s goal of countering Russia would be fairly plainly defined if Ukraine joined. However, that is also the reason why nations like Poland initially desired to be a part of NATO. Western Europe has important markets and an even more useful military to prevent the Russians from reclaiming their empire, despite the fact that Eastern Europe doesn’t particularly like it. However, in contrast to Soviet propaganda, there is no such vision on the part of the core NATO countries. particularly America. Because of this, nobody is really sure how to handle Ukraine’s request for membership. Accepting it would entail committing to countering Russia, whereas rejecting NATO would be an admission that it lacks any real purpose and is corporeal and formless. It’s simpler to simply punt. Take this peculiar standard NATO video, which is all about Ukraine and doubles as a Biden campaign commercial. Why not allow NATO to join if the NATO agenda is attributable to Ukraine? What is NATO’s agenda if Ukraine isn’t on it? In the 1990s, figuring this out would have been as easy as planning away. or whenever before things started happening without having to wait for London or Washington to understand what was going on. Our governments, however, are croft. They are there to carry out various social agendas while spending money that has been appropriated. When confronted with problems that need to be clarified, they stumble and flee. It may be a bad idea to include Ukraine in NATO, but why even have NATO? What function does it fulfill? Its purpose is to deter whom? When you ask questions like that, conceptual responses make them nervous. Conceptual queries are also horrific when institutions are at odds. What if all of this enormous infrastructure serves no purpose other than to support itself? With no strategy, changing goal posts, sense of the outcome, or decisions that couldn’t be changed two weeks afterwards, the United States was dragged into the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The decision-making process has been a failure perhaps by Biden standards. But when you don’t know what you’re doing and someone more does, that’s what happens.
Once governments are created, it’s almost impossible to remove them, even if nobody can define their exact purpose. Take NATO. Its purpose was pretty obvious during the Cold War. After the Cold War its purpose is not so clear. In this sense, the request for Ukraine to join NATO is a helpful clarification.
Biden made this statement during a conversation recorded with CNN. He said that there is no consensus within NATO about when to allow Ukraine join the military alliance. Biden also mentioned certain issues regarding Ukraine’s eligibility such as the lack of democratization.
Biden said on CNN that if Ukraine joined NATO, it would be clear what its mission was: to counter Russia. It’s also the reason why countries like Poland joined NATO in the first place. Eastern Europe does not like Western Europe. However, the latter has a useful military and markets that can keep the Russians at bay. Particularly America. No one knows what to make of Ukraine’s request for membership. Accepting it means committing to countering Russia, while rejecting it is an admission that NATO has no purpose and is formless. It’s easier to punt. Take this odd official NATO video, which doubles as Biden’s campaign commercial and is all about Ukraine. Why not allow NATO to join if the NATO agenda can be reduced to Ukraine? What is NATO’s agenda if it is not Ukraine? In the 90s, it would have been easy to figure this out. Or before the events started, without waiting for D.C. and London to figure it out. But our governments are croft. They exist to spend money and push various political agendas. When faced with clear problems, they stumble and run away. Having Ukraine in NATO may be a bad idea, but why is NATO even there? What is its purpose? Who is it meant to deter? Once you start asking questions like this, the answers are uncomfortable because they are definitional. Definitional questions can be traumatic when institutions are in a state of flux. What if all this vast infrastructure actually has no purpose except its own self-perpetuation?The U.S. was dragged into the Russia-Ukraine war with no plan, shifting goal posts, no sense of outcome and no decisions that aren’t open to being revised two weeks later. Even by Biden’s standards, the decision making has been a disaster. It’s what happens when someone else knows what they’re doing while you don’t.
