Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Could China Be Planning Something?
Putin’s invasion of the Crimea reportedly caught the White House, the Pentagon, the CIA, and the State Department off guard. It is a good time to ask, “What else might be in the pipeline?”
Think about it. We have an ostentatiously weak President, who seems to be intent on harming our friends and helping our enemies, and he is too vain to be able to admit — even to himself — that he has made a series of egregious foreign-policy mistakes and that the world does not work in the fashion in which he thinks it does.
Putin thumped him but good on Syria and did a little victory dance on the op-ed page of The New York Times. Now, thinking — as Nikita Khrushchev did with regard to John F. Kennedy — that he is dealing with a total wimp, he has decided to do to the Ukraine what Hitler did to Czechoslovakia in 1938, which is to say: carve off an ethnic conclave and swallow it down. The difference is that Hitler acted like a gentleman and sought permission first, which suggests a certain respect on his part for Neville Chamberlain, while Vlad the Impaler has opted for open thuggery and a public display of contempt, and he has simply whipped out his carving knife and begun doing the job. Obama was apparently not even worthy of consultation.
But this is all obvious. The next move is not. A former student of mine is willing to hazard a guess. After reading the piece I posted a few days ago, he wrote to me the following:
I did read you on Ukraine with interest, as always. But notice China’s silence…. I’m sure Putin worked things out in advance with the Chinese. They can expand into the Pacific, while Putin expands into the Ukraine. Ukraine sets a precedent of sorts for a Pacific expansion by the Chinese. Those Chinese living up in Siberia make for a very long term issue when compared with the amazing opportunities in far more important parts of the world that are offered by three more years of the current American administration. That’s my take on things.
He is right about one thing. The Chinese are on board:
Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov discussed Ukraine by telephone with his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, on Monday, and claimed they had “broadly coinciding points of view” on the situation there, according to a ministry statement.
Speaking at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva later, Mr Lavrov said Russian troops were necessary in Ukraine “until the normalisation of the political situation” and dismissed threats of sanctions and boycotts.
He added: “We call for a responsible approach, to put aside geopolitical calculations, and above all to put the interests of the Ukrainian people first.”
Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang said: “China has always upheld the principles of diplomacy and the fundamental norms of international relations.
“At the same time we also take into consideration the history and the current complexities of the Ukrainian issue.”
My former student may also be right about the rest. If China were to seize Taiwan, I can imagine the Russian foreign ministry spokesman saying, “Russia has always upheld the principles of diplomacy and the fundamental norms of international relations. At the same time we also take into consideration the history and the current complexities of the Taiwan issue.”
I could easily imagine Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping doing a Hitler-Stalin tango. Folks, this will not be over before the fat lady sings.
Sarah Palin saw all of this coming in 2008. Mitt Romney saw it in 2012. We ought to be asking ourselves, “What next?”
Published in General
A blast from the past!
Everybody’s jumping all over Obama and Democrats in general. But the current fix is a joint project. Reps and Dems together have created a debt so monstrous that the idea of protecting the world – an extremely expensive proposition – is a joke. Reps and Dems together failed to follow Eisenhower’s advice (during his military-industrial complex speech?) that Europe was back on its feet and needed to be cut loose so it could learn to protect itself. Reps and Dems together, since the fall of the Soviet Union, have pushed American “obligations” far into the former Soviet Union. Thanks to those three things, we’re now in a situation where a relatively small piece of land full of Russians who want to be part of Russia again – a natural desire – has world shaking implications. If Reps and Dems TOGETHER had not done those three things, this would be no bigger than, say, the split of Czechoslovakia into two nations.
PS, partisanship – and Ricochet, for all its superlative thinkers – is extremely partisan – blinds people to their own defects and exaggerates the defects of the opposition.
We can think two steps ahead, but we also have to ask the more general questions about self-interest. While it’s true (I’d argue) that Russia is exploiting Obama’s weakness, it’s still a gamble for them to go into the Ukraine. Things could turn bad for Russia. And if they do, you know that Obama is going to claim that he knew it all along, and “baited” Putin into a bad decision.
Obama doesn’t make reality look good. He just depends on after-the-fact mendacity to lie about his failures. He’s got plenty of lipstick for pigs of all occasions.
People often cite economic incentives for peace as reasons belligerent regimes will not go to war. Those incentives always exist. So does war.
You are correct in that, for many moons, Republican administrations have enjoyed and engaged in deficit spending.
President Reagan was the last Republican President who actually called for the elimination of a government department (the Department of Education).
I’m surprised that we take Lavrov at his word that the Chinese are on board. As multiple sources reported immediately after that Sky report, any actual Chinese statements about Ukraine do not support the Russian claim.
They are more than happy to hang the Russians out to dry as this pretext could be used against Chinese interests in the east.
Whatever China is up to, I’m offering extra prayers for our folks stationed in Guam. Also, it’s notable that Obama’s FY 2015 budget took out entitlement reform, ensuring little room for defense spending flexibility. If military action becomes necessary, Obama will force the GOP to pay for it, financially and politically. Once again, he’ll use a crisis to his advantage no matter the cost to our people and national interest. I wish the GOP leadership would call him out. This isn’t an isolationist v. interventionist debate, and we should resist the Left’s effort to frame it as such. This is about Obama willfully diminishing our standing in the world to finance his statist goals.
Does this mean the theory about Putin being the ‘world’s biggest fool’ was wrong? Wasn’t the idea that this agression would hurt his relations with China in the long-term; but now it seems they are in cahoots?
“Think about it. We have an ostentatiously weak President, who seems to be intent on harming our friends and helping our enemies, and he is too vain to be able to admit — even to himself — that he has made a series of egregious foreign-policy mistakes and that the world does not work in the fashion in which he thinks it does.”
At what point do we finally ask…are these really mistakes? I know it’s hard to even imagine this but why not?
Paul quotes Dan Hanson’s observation of the need for a two-front military capability. The always-authoritative Wikipedia has a short article on the subject http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-front_war that mentions the erstwhile 600-ship US Navy. Even in the 80s, DOD doctrine gradually devolved from a win-win strategy to win-hold-win. Now we are at hold-hold at best. When the current downsizing is done, we’ll be at hold (until we can re-mobilize).
China is not going to launch a military assault on anyone- it simply is not how they operate. Bluster and posture to achieve some kind of tactical or strategic goal? Of course. But dating back thiousands of years, including through all of Mao’s regime, they simply don’t go any farther than Northern Vietnam or North Korea, and not very far in or for long.
People who suggest that China is about to launch overseas military operations for the first time in its history, particularly against the country that owns much of its business infrastructure (people who downgrade the importance of knowledgeable experienced management in any industrial enterprise are fools) have obviously not studied China very much or spent any time there.
I don’t think so. My understanding is that the U.S. has long maintained a policy of “deliberate ambiguity” about the use of military force in response to a mainland invasion of Taiwan. But even if the U.S. was legally obliged to respond (as it would with a NATO country), that obligation would arise by treaty and I don’t believe there could be any sanction if the President were to disregard a treaty obligation. As Bush did with the ATM treaty. ·13 hours ago
You are undoubtedly right, and Nixon jettisoned whatever obligations we had to Taiwan when he made his overture to China.
No, and I teach one of those courses: Case Studies in the Origins of War (Peloponnesian War, World War I, Second Punic War, World War II, the Cuban Missile Crisis).
No, China has to love this. It opens the door for them to do the same later. If your enemy is shooting himself in the foot, hand him the ammunition!
At what point do we finally ask…are these really mistakes? I know it’s hard to even imagine this but why not? ·7 hours ago
I often wonder whether he favors the home team.
People who suggest that China is about to launch overseas military operations for the first time in its history, particularly against the country that owns much of its business infrastructure (people who downgrade the importance of knowledgeable experienced management in any industrial enterprise are fools) have obviously not studied China very much or spent any time there. ·4 hours ago
We shall see.
At what point do we finally ask…are these really mistakes? I know it’s hard to even imagine this but why not? ·7 hours ago
I often wonder whether he favors the home team. ·50 minutes ago
“Not ‘God bless America!’, but ‘God damn America!'”
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright
People who suggest that China is about to launch overseas military operations for the first time in its history, particularly against the country that owns much of its business infrastructure (people who downgrade the importance of knowledgeable experienced management in any industrial enterprise are fools) have obviously not studied China very much or spent any time there. ·4 hours ago
We shall see. ·16 hours ago
Note the word “military”. Spend some time there, reviewing history (even under the Communists) or studying the entirety of the internal politics and you will see the same thing.
The leadership is so afraid of the population that they don’t supply the army with ammunition for their guns. They don’t have a tested logistics support to back up front line troops.
People who suggest that China is about to launch overseas military operations for the first time in its history, particularly against the country that owns much of its business infrastructure (people who downgrade the importance of knowledgeable experienced management in any industrial enterprise are fools) have obviously not studied China very much or spent any time there. ·4 hours ago
We shall see.
Note the word “military”. Spend some time there, reviewing history (even under the Communists) or studying the entirety of the internal politics and you will see the same thing.
The leadership is so afraid of the population that they don’t supply the army with ammunition for their guns. They don’t have a tested logistics support to back up front line troops.
Double_Like
Note the word “military”. Spend some time there, reviewing history (even under the Communists) or studying the entirety of the internal politics and you will see the same thing.
The leadership is so afraid of the population that they don’t supply the army with ammunition for their guns. They don’t have a tested logistics support to back up front line troops. ·2 hours ago
A close observer can see the power struggle. The civilian government and the military compete for influence/prestige. It’s a fascinating country.