Tuesday, the Japanese Islands crumbled and fell into the Pacific Ocean.

I’m quite sure that the item above could have happened and no one would have found out, because every media outlet in the United States was (and still is) intently, insanely focused on the O.J. verdict and its fallout.

Rather than rehash a bunch of O.J. blather, and to take everyone’s mind, including mine, off of the O.J. circus, I will take a look at an important topic that got buried last week – the planned expansion of NATO.

NATO is looking to expand from 16 members by the turn of the century, and the alliance released its criteria for admission of new members last week. Naturally, the prime candidates for this expansion are in Eastern Europe; namely Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland. Expanding NATO’s membership has major support in the U.S. government and in the older Western European members.

The general feeling is that expanding NATO into Eastern Europe would provide a viable framework for keeping the peace in the region, where ethnic tensions still exist and not only in the former Yugoslavia.

Expansion would also keep NATO viable and give it purpose in the post-Cold War world. NATO was formed to keep the Soviets out of Europe following the communist takeover of Eastern Europe following World War Two. Of course, the communist threat is long dead, and some questions about why NATO should still exist have been raised.

Economics also play a large part in the decision. Newly-admitted countries would be more likely to trade with the European Community and the United States, and NATO membership would probably be the first step toward full E.C. admission.

Even more important to established NATO nations is the prospect of new customers for Western weapons. NATO members must have some commonality in weapons and especially communications systems, and reequipping the former Warsaw Pact nations with modern Western systems would prove a boon for Western defense firms. Of course, the one factor keeping NATO from expanding with reckless abandon is Russia.

Russian President Boris Yeltsin has warned that expansion could “light the flame of war,” and more extreme politicians have stated that if NATO expands eastward that World War Three would would begin.

That is somewhat unlikely; cooler heads would probably prevail if an unpredictable leader tried to spark a war over NATO moving up to Russia’s borders. However, Russia is totally opposed to expansion unless it also is invited to join up.

Why is Russia so paranoid about NATO moving east? Russia has had a serious isolationist streak for most of its history, primarily because it has been invaded approximately once a month since the Kremlin was first built in the 10th century. Well, not actually that many times, but the Russians have suffered through some horrible wars on their home turf.

Remember, the Soviets lost 20 million people in World War II while fighting the Nazis. Russia feels that a geographic “buffer zone” made up of countries with governments which lean toward Moscow gives them a level of protection. NATO’s eastward push would deprive them of the zone, and while it may not be necessary in today’s world, the old xenophobia present in Russia keeps the need for it alive.

Russia is also feeling left out of world affairs these days. It is no longer considered a true superpower, and it was not seriously consulted on what to do in Yugoslavia.

The Serbs are traditional Russian allies, and NATO’s bombing campaign has not made the Russians terribly happy, especially since they were totally against it and NATO went and did it anyway.

Russia has also been left out of the G-7, the members of which are the world’s most powerful industrialized nations. The fierce rhetoric coming out of Moscow over NATO is an attempt to gain a place on the world stage when no one is really listening.

The big reason Russia wants to become a part of NATO, and create a security system that stretches from the Aleutian Islands to the Kamchatka Peninsula, probably has to do with keeping the Chinese at bay. The Chinese have probably looked north to resource-rich Siberia and figured that they could develop it better than the Russians have and make a serious bundle of cash from it.

A popular misconception is that the Soviets and Chinese were allies during the Cold War. In fact, they came close to all-out war on a couple of occasions, and relations have been rather cold ever since.

A warming occurred in the late 1980’s, and Russia is selling arms to the Chinese, but that has to do more with economic reality than warm-and-fuzzy feelings between the two nations; Russia will sell its gear to anyone with the cash these days.

An expanded NATO is a good idea. Eastern European nations would benefit the security that comes from NATO membership, and no doubt they figure that being full NATO members would help keep the Russians under control in the region.

The right wing in Russia has the former Warsaw Pact members worried, since talk of re-establishing the old Soviet empire has surfaced now and again. NATO membership would obviously make an extremist Russian government think twice about an move against their old allies. Of course, a slow, deliberate move toward expansion is in order; provoking the Russians would not be wise, even if their military capability isn’t as powerful as it once was.

But the Russians are going to have to face the reality that they will have to accept NATO’s growth, whether it is with them or not.

---

Kevin S. Kirby is a senior in journalism mass communication from Louisville, Ky. He has a B.A. in political science from the University of Wyoming.