Romania, Bukovina and NATO's end
Vlad Tepes, better known as Vlad the Impaler, is the most famous and revered king (c.1448-77) of Romania. That ought to tell you something about Romania (then called Wallachia). Admittedly, nobody ever wanted to get on the bad side of Vlad. Even so, he was very fair-minded and usually reserved his horrifying punishment for foreign invaders and corrupt officials. An honest man had nothing to fear from Vlad. Under his reign there were few laws and even less crime. Prisons weren't needed: the punishment for all crime was the same. Now we have untold thousands of laws, multitudinous prisons, millions incarcerated and unrestrained crime of all sort. With the whole of western civilization on the verge of societal collapse, one might logically ask "what happened?"
One thing that did remain constant is Romanian foreign policy. Most Americans, including those in the State Department, don't even know that Romania has a foreign policy. By American reckoning all the nations of Eastern Europe only exist to serve American interests. It doesn't matter that Romania's national strategy is over 600 years old dating back before Jamestown was established in 1607. Vlad's policy was unification with Moldavia (now Moldova), and the conquest of Transylvania; then ruled by Hungary. It is Romanian now but Transylvania is still the object of NATO ally Hungary's ambition; it was theirs for 1200 years and is Romanian for less than 100. Both are in NATO but that doesn't mean Hungary isn't ready to pounce should opportunity arise.
Romania picked up huge tracts of Hungarian territory when her queen Marie (1914-27) was wise enough to pick the winning side in war; famously saying "England always wins the last battle." In this case (1918) she was right as Hungary, then allied with its oldest and only friend, went down to defeat with the Germans. By this time Marie and her clan had picked up Moldavia and another succulent province: Northern Bukovina. The Vienna Awards (1940) stripped Romania of northern Transylvania (again) so she allied this time with Germany and looked east. For Romania, eyeing not only the ripe Bessarabia but Odessa as well, a declaration of war on Russia seemed like the right thing to do at the time. It wasn't. By 1944 the Red Army conquered Romania, retook Bukovina and placed all of Eastern Europe within the iron and malevolent grip of Stalinist Russia. Free of Stalinist shackles in 1989 and given the opportunity to stick something hard and nasty into Russia, Romania joined NATO. Contrary to their own interests, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria and the Baltic micro-states did too. Do they really think America will defend them? What they need is Russian friendship and resources; not its hostility. America gives them nothing except bombs at cost. This is why the present NATO alliance is unrealistic. All these eastern European countries passionately hate one another and have a long history of barbaric atrocity fueled warfare against each other. In Eastern Europe politics, Vlad Tepes is a moderate.
What of Bukovina? Just because it's now Ukrainian doesn't matter in the least. It is a rich country and the numbers people say it will be a wealthy addition to Romania's tax-base. War is the great equalizer, a universal solvent that emulsifies everything in its path. Lee said "It's a good thing war is so terrible lest we love it." When Obama picked out drone victims over coffee and danish he described it as "thrilling." People died to cheers in the Roman Coliseums. It's an old story. When Russian troops soon march into Odessa, President Zelensky will realize he couldn't bullshit the gods of war. The allure of Ukrainian lands, free for the taking, will arouse Poland, Hungary and Romania. Poland will annex Ukrainian Lviv and all the land around it, Hungary the Transcarpathian Ruthenia (Slovakia may want to dip in there too) and Bukovina by Romania. They will seize vast swathes of Ukrainian territory all the while professing their deep and abiding admiration for the brave and courageous people of Ukraine whom they love so much. Ukraine will be reduced to the small land-locked agricultural rump state it always was and the rest of Eastern Europe will rejoice in their calamity. Bulgaria might then dig into the pudding and annex Macedonia in all the confusion. This will be NATO's collapse and demise. Eastern Europe already sees that its fortunes lay that way. They are especially embittered with the western woke values that come as a parcel with NATO membership. They've had enough of it.
Can Ukraine survive as a nation with wolves all around them? Their strongest ally would have been Russia; the Great Protector of all things Slav. A strong and independent Ukraine would have served Russia's interests as a bulwark against the West. Instead, Ukraine preferred to be wrecked in an alliance with NATO and its people served up as cannon fodder to test American military equipment against live targets.* As people say nowadays; Ukraine made some bad choices.
*Ukraine Defense Minister Offers Ukraine as a 'Testing Ground' for NATO Weapons: click here
1
1
1
