From Conrad Black, the National Review: NATO today is essentially an arrangement between formerly Soviet-occupied countries in desperate need, for obvious historic reasons, of a U.S. military guarantee against Russia, and a cordial alliance that includes a democratic Germany; and the countries that joined the U.S.-led NATO originally to resist Soviet expansionism, and that now retain the American guarantee as a cost-free insurance policy. They believe in the “alliance of the willing,” meaning that they graciously accept the U.S. guarantee, but that, as each crisis arises, they will decide whether it pleases them to assist the Americans in doing anything about it. This does not fit the normal definition of an alliance.

NATO should become the foundation of a new alliance system, in which all passable democracies (a criterion the original NATO waived in several cases) agree on the defense of their own borders, including a carefully crafted policy of preemptive assault against plausibly apprehended terrorism, including defined failed states. NATO could also make parallel agreements with important non-democratic states such as Russia and China. …

An enlarged and repurposed (and appropriately renamed) NATO could concert with China and Russia and other important non-democratic states on a massive clean-up of the United Nations, so that it becomes a serious forum, with reasonably honest agencies, and not just a playpen and slush fund for the world’s most retrograde and perverse governments.  (photo: Jeff Roberson/AP)

Image: ap%205%2020%2010%20Conrad%20Black.jpg