There are now big demonstrations by young Japanese against the new stationing of the George Washington (a nuke CV (aircraft carrier that is replacing the former conventionally powered Forrestal)) and regular demonstrations by the South Korean youth against a continued US presence (the US will be shifting 5,000 odd marines soon to Guam, paid for by the South Korean government).

The most telling is western influence in the UN, in particular the UN Human Rights Body:
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=137201

It is difficult not to see this shift in light of Western policy since 1989, i.e. ‘humanitarian intervention/bombing’ in other countries without UN sanction. Add to this that Serbia has succeeded in getting is demand for approval of its plan to challenge the West’s illegal recognition of Kosovo at the ICJ (something that many western governments have put Serbia under very strong pressure to drop) to be discussed at the UN General Assembly (http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=09&dd=23&nav_id=53679) before following this up (Octoberish) , and there is a shift occuring.

There is little doubt that the pendulum has started to swing back, but how far and where it will ultimately settle is impossible to say. The next US administration may well ‘bounce back’ quickly, but as always, many of these things come down to timing/windows of opportunity which the US may well have missed a number already. Wall Street & Canary Warf will have to share with one or two more financial centers in Asia for sure….

German-US Tensions Grow Over Baltic Pipeline
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,579677,00.html

The real question in this case is would a new potential democratic administration actually be any different in its outlook and its behavior?

So what does this deliberate pissing off of the Germans achieve?

Why the tantrum (rhetorical question)???

Fresh from the kitchen

Britain and the United States are headed for a diplomatic row after the U.S. let slip hopes that 4,000 more British troops will be sent to Afghanistan.

UK Defence Secretary Des Browne promptly rebuffed the claim.

Stephen Sackur talks to Georgia’s president, Mikhail Saakashvili. It was really Hard Talk for Sackur
You should listen to this piece. The guy was so insane that Sackur wished him to choke with his tie I guess. It’s also clear from the interview that Saak was sent “на йух” by NATO.

I don’t know about Saak’s IQ at Yale but now his IQ is irrelevant – he is leaving in his Illusions and Dreams… far-far away

Who is ‘extrapolating’ now???

I simply provided an example of one of many smaller pieces. NATO cannot be taken separately from other European developments.

I really do like the way that you lump everyone together you don’t agree with and ascribe to them the simplistic “Russian’s star is ascending and that the US and NATO are deeply divided and economically devestated.”

BTW, why are you doing this straw man thing (above and your comment about Sweden being in NATO)?

I guess the opposite of ‘extrapolation’ is ‘myopia’.

Since when is discussion or even debate among close allies evidence of an alliance soon to fall apart?

It isn’t and never was. You are exaggerating and being wishful over something that is not going to happen.

You are very long-winded about it also, but you present almost no facts or details.

Show me the quotes from German leaders discussing how they should resign from NATO.

There seems to be this fundamental Russian flaw, likely cultural, that sees debate or discussion within government or among nations as being evidence of deep problems.

It is like saying that having an argument with your wife about her purchasing a new dress … means you are about to get a divorce. Very silly logic indeed.

Wow. That’s really damning.

No doubt, Russia and Germany are working on developing an alternative gas pipeline together which will result in closer economic ties. But that is not a case for suggesting deep divisions within NATO.

You would have a stronger case to present if you focused on Turkey, but even that is not a strong argument.

There seems to be this problem on this forum lately of people extrapolating far, far beyond the facts that exist. A great deal of Russian wishful thinking, tied to this idea that Russian’s star is ascending and that the US and NATO are deeply divided and economically devestated.

It is gross overstatement and premature. Further, as something like 60% of Russia’s GDP is tied to export of gas and oil, they better hope the world economy remains strong. Much of the current oil price is tied to speculation, meaning those prices are projected based upon increasing demand.

Changes in the US economy has ramifications across the globe and would affect oil and gas demands or consumption. Oil prices have corrected themselves before and likely will do so again, with unpleasant ramifications for the Russian economy, which is not so well developed or diverse as some might like to believe.

In other words, be careful what you wish for.

The point is that Germany and the US are members, so we have one member (US) winding up another member (Germany) by adding support to Swedish critics of Nord Stream (who are using the environmental argument against its construction). Whether Sweden is a member of NATO is irrelevant.