EDITORIAL : REWRITING HISTORY CLINTON MIXES APPLES WITH ORANGES IN COMPARING NATO EXPANSION TO THE MARSHALL PLAN.

PRESIDENT Clinton got carried away - no doubt intentionally - during his Memorial Day pitch for expanding the North American Treaty Organization.

Speaking near the grave of Secretary of State George C. Marshall, Clinton likened his potentially costly and risky proposal to the initiation of the Marshall Plan in 1947 to aid war-ravaged Europe.

``A half century ago, he (Marshall) knew that in order to be strong at home and safe at home we had to lead the world to become a more secure and better place,'' Clinton said. ``Now at the end of the Cold War, when there appears to be no looming threat on the horizon, we must rise to Marshall's challenge in our days.''

But the challenge 50 years ago was finding a way to put Europe back on its feet economically, caring for millions of destitute people and avoiding a social upheaval that might play into the ruthless hands of Josef Stalin. No such challenge exists today.

NATO was formed in 1949 to counter an external threat - the Soviet Union. But the Soviet Union is history, and Russia now is governed by people who mostly are trying to establish democratic institutions.

Our fear is that expansion of NATO would weaken democratic leaders in Russia politically. It might easily make them vulnerable to attacks by anti-Western ultranationalists, who can accuse Russian President Boris Yeltsin (he signed an agreement with NATO on Tuesday) of selling out to foreigners ganging up on Moscow.

Don't underestimate the appeal of that kind of rhetoric to millions of Russians who have long mistrusted the West and, in many cases, are disenchanted with the changes that have occurred since the collapse of communism.

Expansion also would extend American commitments - most likely to the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary - at a time when U.S. forces in Europe are being reduced. This doesn't make sense militarily.

The primary objective of U.S. policy in this post-Cold War era should be to encourage the growth of democracy and free-market economies in Russia and other former Soviet republics. Our overriding concern is that NATO expansion would stand in the way of that vital goal.