Will NATO bomb in future?

[Seth Ackerman]

Doug wrote:

> Sure the bombing didn't succeed if you think the goal
> was to prevent a "humanitarian catastrophe." But if you think the
> point was
> to demonstrate NATO's power and scare the hell out of other potential
> targets, then it looks lots more like a success.
> 
	[Seth Ackerman]  

	Although it did terrorize the population, the bombing pretty
much failed on the "strengthen NATO" score, too. The Europeans have
concluded that the Americans are incompetent and imperious; that they've
been left with a big festering sore in their own backyard (and got stuck
with the tab, too); and that further "allied actions" will only further
alienate the Russians, which Europe is VERY concerned about. (Especially
the Germans.)

	Now, the Europeans are strengthening their autonomous defense
identity. Electing Javier Solana as the new EU defense cheif was a
victory for the Americans. But the long-term effects are to split the
European away even more, I think.

	Plus, the idea of Nato EVER acting out of area again is out of
the question.

	Seth