What's next?, next war Romanians could be part of

About Stratfor, George Friedman, director and founder, was last week in Romania, and now he go to Moldova. Look here at his conclusions:

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20101115_ge..._part_3_romania

what the author wanted to say with "It is even at a pitch my Hungarian part can’t hear."? I can't translate this.

This sentence refers to the previous one. So, they must be read together to be understood:

"The Romanians hear things that I am deaf to. It is even at a pitch my Hungarian part can’t hear."

This can be translated to something like this: "Romanii aud chestii pt. care eu sint surd. [Aceste zgomote] sint la un nivel [de sunet] care nici macar partea maghiara din mine nu poate aude".

By the way, although generally I don't pay too much what Americans say about Rumania (and Europe, in general), this particular essay is worth reading as it raises several interesting points and thoughts (although I do not agree with some of them). It shows his parents were from that area, so he is both fond and repulsive to the region - a mix of sentiments often found in Jews originating from Central and Eastern Europe.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on November 18, 2010 10:01 pm

Another interwiew, George Friedman for Hotnews, about Romania, Russia, Moldove, NATO, UE; Germany, etc. And how NATO could react.

http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-esential-80425...u-americani.htm

The man has good points but also some weaknesses in his analysis.

He thinks somehow in the classical americanocentric way, a little naive, military power oriented, and with an anti-UE bias.

Nothing about the soft power the UE can use, and overestimating the Russia`s power. The russians at the moment are trying disperatly to block a further expansion of NATO primarily, and also UE, in what remained of their previous sphere of influence, because otherwise they will have them at the border, several hundreds of kilometers from their capital. The war with Georgia was a signal about further expansion, otherwise they would have fully occupied it and place a puppet leadership.

He has a good point about the Intermarium, the strategic alliance between the states which make the border of EU/NATO.

He has also a good point about th necessity for a strong military of Romania as detterent. 48 multirole fighters, 24 attack helicopters, decent SAM`s and AT missiles. Several mobile land-based antiship missiles launchers, combined with an OTH radar, can keep the litoral and the gap between Danube delta and Crimean peninsula under control. If these missiles would have 300 km range, they can block the port of Sevastopol.

This post has been edited by Hadrian on November 18, 2010 10:24 pm

Denes, thank you very much for the translation!!

I consider the article in the same way you did.

I also believe that the article is not so objective as it's author might wanted to be, especially because that particular fragment I couldn't translate.

In my opinion his idea is not good at all. This is 2010 not 1920s. There is no point behind such an alliance.

Back to reality though:

http://www.ziare.com/basescu/presedinte/ba...politia-1056571

If there was any necessity for a strong Romanian military the US would have given us several billion dollars in military assistance like they give other countries.

I don`t mean that Romania should become a great power, but to have a credible defense force.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_Netherlands

Look as an example a EU country smaller than us, without ambitions, border diferends and in a safer position than ours.

US never gives moneys except in conflict areas (Afghanistan, Pakistan) etc. Anyway, we should start finally to take care of ourselves, not to wait always for somebody to do it.

The strategic alliance should an influence group inside NATO, not outside. In this case, for example, if Russia cuts the gas to somebody, they can have all their borders to Europe closed until they come to sense. And without exports, they will start to starve real soon.

This post has been edited by Hadrian on November 19, 2010 05:12 pm

We never took care of ourselfs, not in ww1 and also not in ww2. Now is the same situation as 94 years ago or 69 years ago, we are empty handed and "în fundu' gol" like always and only because our fault, cos we always choosed the bad politicians who had the only purpose to steal as much money as they could from the state, doing business with it.

There are regional alliances in today's Europe.

Look, for example, at Visegrad's four (alliance among the Central European countries: Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary - soon probably to expand, to include the EU member Croatia as well).

Therefore, regional alliances do have a role in today's Europe.

Gen. Dénes

Yes but in my understanding Friedman presents the Intermarum not necessarily as complementary to NATO and EU but as a possible replacement. He argues NATO and EU are illusions that do not actually answer Romania's military security and economic development needs. In my opinion his visit to the region and articles are some 20 years late. The debate he proposes would have been useful before the Central and Eastern European countries rushed to join NATO and EU and before they were allowed in.

Next trip, next anallyse, about Moldova:

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20101118_ge..._part_4_moldova

The really cold shoulder...
Pas tres poli / Not very polite

http://cristiannegrea.blogspot.com/2010/10...-coloniile.html

And one poit of wiew:

http://cristiannegrea.blogspot.com/2010/11...fghanistan.html

The head of presidential administration from Moscow, Sergei Narîşkin, visited Chisinau today, and witnessed the signing of the coalition document between the Communist Party and the Democratic Party.
http://unimedia.md/?mod=news&id=27006