[Goose]

Indeed a good point. There is a lot of real uncertainty out there. Add Vietnam to the nations that are actively and vocally worried about the behavior of China. Uncertainty also opens the door wider to miscalculations, so the danger grows. Ukraine and Georgia in NATO is a US military nightmare, but we may sooner rather than later be confronted with that reality.

I have never heard any chatter about letting Georgia join NATO. Why would NATO countries want to take on that obligation for a tiny country with little strategic value that is not at all feasible to defend from Russian aggression?

In 2008 at the Bucharest Summit both Georgia and Ukraine were "guaranteed" eventual NATO membership. At that time, both countries were of "little strategic value that is not at all feasible to defend from Russian aggression", but were offered anyway. Neither Georgia nor Ukraine has forgotten that. Neither have the Baltic States, which quite often bring up this issue. The see their fate as intertwined with Georgia and Ukraine and feel a duty to represent their interests. Most of the NATO countries on the eastern flank of NATO feel the same to a lesser or greater degree. The US and Germany don't feel that way, but as far as "buzz" goes, among the NATO members it is very much there. The day Ukraine gets in is the day they start lobbying heavily for Georgia.

Arguably, it was stupid to make such an offer, but it was made and lots of "credibility" is being discussed at least by the smaller NATO states at a minimum. This isn't going away anytime soon.

[Goose]

Indeed a good point. There is a lot of real uncertainty out there. Add Vietnam to the nations that are actively and vocally worried about the behavior of China. Uncertainty also opens the door wider to miscalculations, so the danger grows. Ukraine and Georgia in NATO is a US military nightmare, but we may sooner rather than later be confronted with that reality.

I have never heard any chatter about letting Georgia join NATO. Why would NATO countries want to take on that obligation for a tiny country with little strategic value that is not at all feasible to defend from Russian aggression?

In 2008 at the Bucharest Summit both Georgia and Ukraine were "guaranteed" eventual NATO membership. At that time, both countries were of "little strategic value that is not at all feasible to defend from Russian aggression", but were offered anyway. Neither Georgia nor Ukraine has forgotten that. Neither have the Baltic States, which quite often bring up this issue. The see their fate as intertwined with Georgia and Ukraine and feel a duty to represent their interests. Most of the NATO countries on the eastern flank of NATO feel the same to a lesser or greater degree. The US and Germany don't feel that way, but as far as "buzz" goes, among the NATO members it is very much there. The day Ukraine gets in is the day they start lobbying heavily for Georgia.

Arguably, it was stupid to make such an offer, but it was made and lots of "credibility" is being discussed at least by the smaller NATO states at a minimum. This isn't going away anytime soon.