NATO to Send 7,000 Troops to Afghanistan

I'd say Obama's new diplomatic policy of showing respect for other nations (or what wingnuts would call bowing and apologizing) is paying off:

NATO Backs McChrystal

Since NATO is backing McChrystal, I suppose that means that the United States doesn't have to supply all of the troops. Perhaps part of Obama's overall strategy is to build an international consensus and get other nations to send troops as well. Who knows. Everyone is just guessing at this point and I'm sure the media and "experts" will continue to speculate until Obama announces the new strategy:

NATO defense ministers gave their broad endorsement Friday to the counterinsurgency strategy for Afghanistan laid out by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, increasing pressure on the Obama administration and on their own governments to commit more military and civilian resources for the mission to succeed.

General McChrystal, the senior American and allied commander in Afghanistan, landed here early Friday to brief NATO defense ministers on his strategic review of an 8-year-old war in which the American-led effort has lost momentum to a tenacious insurgency. The closed-door session — which had not been disclosed in advance — added a note of drama to the sort of NATO ministerial meeting that is often mundane.

“What we did today was to discuss General McChrystal’s overall assessment, his overall approach, and I have noted a broad support from all ministers of this overall counterinsurgency approach,” said NATO’s secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
....
Kai Eide, the United Nations special representative for Afghanistan, flew to Slovakia to meet NATO defense chiefs, and he stressed that “additional international troops are required.” He also told the allies, “This cannot be a U.S.-only enterprise.”

Mr. Eide acknowledged that it may be difficult to rally public support for force contributions while allegations of election fraud continue to taint the government of Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president.
NYT

How the Russian Georgian Conflict Turned Messy

Apparently, Russia is now taking missiles into South Osettia.
Some excellent reporting by the NYT that shows there's plenty of blame to be spread around.
Georgia was led to believe that the US was going to engage militarily. Bush got too chummy with Georgian president Mikeil Saakashvili. Disagreements within the Bush administration on how to deal with Russia: Hawks and doves. I bet you can guess who they are. Russia pounces to get at the U.S. and Georgia. 
A failed administration, once again. Can't wait until Sen. Joe Biden, who's in Georgia now, at the request of Saakashvili, gives us the lowdown. Meanwhile, sadly, innocent people die. What an outrage. 

The story of how a 16-year, low-grade conflict over who should rule two small, mountainous regions in the Caucasus erupted into the most serious post-cold-war showdown between the United States and Russia is one of miscalculation, missed signals and overreaching, according to interviews with diplomats and senior officials in the United States, the European Union, Russia and Georgia. In many cases, the officials would speak only on the condition of anonymity.

It is also the story of how both Democrats and Republicans have misread Russia’s determination to dominate its traditional sphere of influence.

As with many foreign policy issues, this one highlighted a continuing fight within the administration. Vice President Dick Cheney and his aides and allies, who saw Georgia as a role model for their democracy promotion campaign, pushed to sell Georgia more arms, including Stinger antiaircraft missiles, so that it could defend itself against possible Russian aggression.

On the other side, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley and William J. Burns, the new under secretary of state for political affairs, argued that such a sale would provoke Russia, which would see it as arrogant meddling in its turf, the officials and diplomats said.

They describe three leaders on a collision course. Mr. Bush, rewarding Georgia for its robust troop contribution to Iraq — at 2,000, the third highest, behind the United States and Britain — promised NATO membership and its accompanying umbrella of American military support. Mr. Putin, angry at what he saw as American infringement right in his backyard, decided that Georgia was the line in the sand that the West would not be allowed to cross. And Mr. Saakashvili, unabashedly pro-American, was determined to show, once and for all, that Georgia was no longer a vassal of Russia.

With a vastly more confident Russia, flush with oil money, a booming economy and a rebuilt military no longer bogged down in Chechnya, the stars were aligned for a confrontation in which Russia could, with a quick show of force, teach a lesson to the United States, Georgia and all of the former Soviet satellites and republics seeking closer ties with the West.

“We have probably failed to understand that the Russians are really quite serious when they say, ‘We have interests and we’re going to defend them,’ ” said James Collins, United States ambassador to Russia from 1997 to 2001. “Russia does have interests, and at some point they’re going to stand up and draw lines that are not simply to be ignored.” This is a must read story

McCain's Retro Foreign Policy

It's true that sometimes retro is hip, but not when it comes to McCain's foreign policy. He talks freely about chucking Russia out of the G8 and bombing Iran or sending them more cigarettes, or referring to Czechoslovakia.

NPR: John McCain often joked that when he looked into former Russian President Vladimir Putin's soul, he didn't see — as President Bush did — a man he could do business with, but rather an ex-KGB officer consolidating power.

"It's a KGB-like operation," McCain said of Putin's approach, "gradual, steady, persistent, successful."

Though Russia has a new president, Dmitry Medvedev, McCain has kept up his tough line, accusing the Russian government of silencing political dissent at home, using energy as a weapon abroad and launching a cyber war against Estonia.

McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, said in a speech in Los Angeles in March that NATO should not stand for such actions, nor should the Group of Eight.

"We should start by ensuring the G-8 — the group of eight highly industrialized states — becomes again a club of leading market democracies," McCain said. "It should include Brazil and India, but exclude Russia."

.....

McCain has talked about kicking Russia out of the G-8 for several years now. Susan Rice, a top foreign policy adviser to Democrat Barack Obama, says speeches like that show McCain is stuck in a Cold War mind-set, trying to demonize Russia.

"John McCain really has a static — I would even argue retro — mid-late 20th century national security orientation, which is ill suited to the challenges we face," Rice said, adding that she sees some contradictions within the McCain campaign.

That retro-ness doesn't seem to be flying with the younger generation either:

CNN: At a town hall meeting in Ohio this month, a student told McCain that Republicans were a dying breed on his campus.

"I understand the challenge I have, and I understand that this election is really all about the people of your generation," McCain said.

Many young Republicans said Sen. Barack Obama, the 46-year-old junior senator from Illinois, is inspiring voters their age, but McCain, the 71-year-old Arizona senator who has been in office since the early '80s, is not.

Eric Pearlmutter, a member of the Young Republicans at the University of Southern California, said the roaring enthusiasm that follows Obama is missing among conservatives his age.

"We try to get people out to our college Republican meetings, but ... we can't seem to draw the same kind of vocal support," he said.

And when is McCain, who is speaking right now about the dangers of smoking at the Livestrong event, going to stop saying "my friends." It's just not right.