<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Coyne On Georgia]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[
<p>This is the <a href="http://blog.macleans.ca/2008/08/14/georgia-on-my-mind/#more-4982">best rebuttal</a> to my own view that pushing NATO to the borders of the Black Sea and beyond is foolish over-reach. I don&#8217;t think offering Georgia NATO membership is a wise move; I do think the West should support democratic polities in Ukraine, Georgia and the Baltic states. There is a balance to be struck between the West&#8217;s obvious interest in getting Russian cooperation in the war on Jihadist terror and preventing Russian meddling in its near-abroad. There&#8217;s a trade-off here. And allowing Russia its traditional sphere of influence may be much less of a headache than trying to police its every move and losing cooperation on such vital matters as securing loose nukes. </p>
<p>What worries me is that McCain&#8217;s eagerness for more conflict in the world &#8211; pushing Russia and China into a corner &#8211; is not in the best interests of the United States. It may be moral; it may be exciting; it may provide the great national purpose McCain thinks we all need to feel. But it ignores the hard trade-offs involved, and perpetuates the whole with-us-or-against us bluster of the last eight years. We need more of that? More enemies? Less diplomacy? More conflict?</p>
<p>Count me out. </p>
]]></html></oembed>