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.
As Russian Forces Fan Out Across the Crimea….
In the American Interest, the most astute observer these last few weeks of developments in Ukraine, Walter Russell Mead:
We shall see how things work out, but at first glance President Putin appears to have stolen yet another march on the sputtering West. [C]omplacent and unobservant Western leaders underestimated Russian decisiveness and determination to surprise….and even as Kremlin forces fan out across the restive province, President Obama seemed unsure just what Putin intends….
Putin, we suspect, wants President Obama’s prestige damaged, and for American foreign policy to endure one setback and humiliation after another. He will happily play Lucy as long as President Obama is willing to play Charlie Brown and run at the football Lucy holds.
[N]either President Obama nor his chief European partner Chancellor Merkel will do anything but seek to defuse the crisis as quickly and painlessly as possible. If Putin offers a face-saving solution that leaves him with some visible gains in exchange for some mostly cosmetic concessions, they will have a hard time saying no even as they wrestle with the ugly financial and political arithmetic that a Ukrainian bailout involves.
If that is how this crisis winds up, the West, the United States and President Obama himself will all have been significantly undermined, and both President Putin and Russia will emerge looking more potent than before….
Benghazi, the administration’s failure to enforce the “red line” in Syria, China’s growing military power and assertiveness, and now this. And add to it all Secretary of Defense Hagel’s proposal earlier this week for defense cuts that would give the nation an army of only 460,000, the smallest since 1940. (By way of comparison, the number of troops we sent to the Middle East for Operation Desert Storm was half a million.)
As Bill Kristol remarked last week, we can recover from any domestic policy President Obama enacts. After he leaves office we can repeal Obamacare and shrink the deficit. But the damage the President can still do to our standing in the world?
That may prove irreversible.
Published in General
Hitler didn’t have (many) tanks until the Sudetenland was ceded. He got some nice factories in that deal. Germany wasn’t ready, but it’s a pointless debate. The time to stop him was when he moved troops into the Rheinland. Had France and Britain reacted strongly, Hitler was prepared to withdraw.
Chamberlain wasn’t sly at all. He was desperate.
Hey Chris, I never said Chamberlain was sly. I said he was lucky. Hitler said he was sly. The question is, why did Hitler think so. I gave the explanation for Hitler’s interpretation and there are a number of historians who support that. Personally, I’m not nearly as confident as I sounded in #27, but, you know, 200 words and all. In any case, the starting point to this discussion has to be earlier. The two world wars and the depression are all, really, a single event of which Munich was a relatively minor part. When people use Remember Munich! to justify America policing the world, they are using a convenient simplification of history, and the Churchill-Roosevelt version of history at that. How ironic that conservatives derive their understanding from them. Churchill was an avowed imperialist who brought his country “this close” to destruction because he was determined to defend empire instead of his country. Roosevelt was a charming politician but lightly educated in history and shallow in understanding. Why is it that neocons accept unthinkingly their version of what happened? It can only be because that version of history is convenient to their globopolicing agenda.
Munich is a cudgel used by the interventionist wing of our party to beat down anyone skeptical of completely uncalculated military action. I am very ignorant of modern Eastern European politics, but my understanding is that an authoritarian but democratically elected president was tossed out by a popular mob. So neighboring authoritarian Russia is slyly moving in most likely to batten down the hatches of its precious navy and bases in the Crimea. And this is the moral equivalent of confronting Hitler? I will agree that the president looks the fool speaking on it, but what precisely is anyone recommending here? I haven’t seen a single concrete proposal offered on Ricochet since Russia began pouring troops in. Are you suggesting we bomb Moscow? Send half a million men into the Crimea? “Maintain our standing” or “stand up to Putin” is not a policy prescription.
Be honest. Do you really care if Crimea is part of the Ukraine or part of Russia? It used to be part of Russia until Khrushev ‘gifted it’ to the Ukraine in the 1950s. We have no dog in this fight.Having said this, the West will arm the Ukraine and stir up the Tatars and Putin will have his hands full before long. What would really fix things though would be a crash in the oil price, say to $50.
Byron Horatio,
I haven’t seen a single concrete proposal offered on Ricochet since Russia began pouring troops in. Are you suggesting we bomb Moscow? Send half a million men into the Crimea? “Maintain our standing” or “stand up to Putin” is not a policy prescription.
Of course, reaction is more difficult than being proactive. What would have been preferred would have been some forethought and understanding Putin would act once the Olympics were over. NATO exercises in Hungary with the 2nd Cavalry Regiment and the 173rd Airborne Brigade (I have no idea if either unit is available) along with German, Polish, British, Czech, and Hungarian forces would have been a good start.
Re: China
The Chinese have not forgotten the Treaty of Nerchinsk signed with Russia in 1689, whereby the Manchus were forced to cede a large swath of Siberia. The Chinese with a generational outlook on history know how to play the long game. They have no need to conquer by force of arms what they can more easily reclaim by migration.
I’ve been told by an expert on Russian affairs that entire cities along the Trans-Siberian Railroad have already been overrun by Chinese migrants. Some of these cities now bear Chinese names not unlike a similar process going on in the U.S. south-west where migrating Latinos have reclaimed areas lost during the Mexican-American War.
One of the keys to understanding Siberia is to view a satellite map of the region taken at night. The railroad illuminated at night looks like the tale of a kite stretching from Moscow to Vladivostok. The true geography of Siberia is, in fact, very linear with 90% of the population living along the railroad. All the easier to conquer if you’re a Chinese migrant.
” I will have much more flexibility after my reelection.” BHO.
Ukraine inherited a rather large nuclear weapons stockpile upon the dissolution of the USSR. Rather than keep those weapons to defend itself they were encouraged to return that stockpile to Russian control. The carrot to induce this transfer was the agreement signed by Bill Clinton and Tony Blair – because guaranteeing territorial integrity is supposedly less costly than nuclear proliferation.
2 questions then – Pretend Ukraine had kept those weapons – would Russia be invading Ukraine today?
Secondly, since the US is not going to pay the treasure to guarantee the territorial integrity of a non-nuclear power under invasion from a nuclear one – what might this portend to either maintaining the nuclear non-proliferation regime or, more importantly, how does this empower a nuclear armed China in its dealings with the non-nuclear countries in Asia?
Only Kristol knows what he thinks. But I suspect you haven’t hit on what he thinks or fears at all.
Perhaps the comparison isn’t Munich or Versailles in his mind. Perhaps it is the collapse of the British Empire–the final turn inward and toward home and hearth. When Britain came home, it did not return home to construct a libertarian, market-driven paradise. It did not turn its once considerable energies toward internal improvements that sparked brave new industries and an ever freer people with greater wealth, growing families, a burgeoning economy and an optimistic eye on the horizon to future prospects.
Instead, it collapsed into softness, self-indulgence: small comforts in the morning and evening, ever-expanding benefits financed at public expense, fewer working hours paid for by the state, long vacations, contracting families, sky-rocketing divorce and abortion rates, and a sclerotic economy and education system.
Yes–and I’d forgotten that. Devastating.
This is about the point where all second-termers have left is foreign policy. So this is only gonna get better.
Look out, Uganda!
Crow, you might be right. Makes sense. I.e., he might think, as Teddy Roosevelt did, that we need regular wars to keep the nation vibrant and manly.
“This may prove irreversible” . . . .
unless the American people repudiate Barack Obama in November, 2014.
Peter, remember Jimmy Carter!
There is a road up from here.
Like it or not, there’s nothing to be done about it right now.
And like it or not, in 2014 and 2016 we are going to have to attempt to use the dead, stinking, rotted, corrupt husk of the Republican party to attempt to effect change. Including being smart about who gets primaried (e.g. primarying Mitch McConnell in Kentucky is going to accomplish nothing, IMO). If the Republicans control the White House, House and Senate there is a very meager chance of partially repairing the terrific damage 8 years of Obama will have done to our standing in the world, and the rocket-sled descent into authoritarian Leftist government the Democrats have us strapped to.
Like it or not this will mean holding our nose really tight, resisting the urge to stay home, or cast protest votes for Libertarian candidates, or (are you listening center-right commentators?) throwing brickbats at our team on the field in the middle of the game, even if they are attempting to execute a bone-headed strategy (save it for the locker room).
Anyone else have any alternate concrete actionable ideas with a chance of succeeding? It would be great to hear them.
For the record I stand by what I posted yesterday. Vladimir Putin is tactically clever. Strategically, however, he is a fool. When China pounces, no one will come to Russia’s defense.
Walter Russell Mead may seem prescient now. But keep this in mind. He voted for Barack Obama in 2008.
Pray China decides to go after Russia first rather than a weakened USA.
Meanwhile, since the grand strategy of Putin’s authoritarian regime has been coming into focus for the better part of a decade, and has recently reached a new height of KGB-inspired duplicitous genius in the “alliance” with Russian Orthodoxy, the way forward for us is also clear.
Barack Obama is incapable of giving a statement that means anything. We are neither loved nor feared abroad.
The US Senate is now the organ of future-oriented US foreign policy. And the old war horses of the Senate, like McCain, are on the way out. It will be up to younger, more hawkish members of the Senate, like Rubio and Ayotte, to stand up to a resurgent Russian despotism.
The US has recently committed to forward deploying four AEGIS BMD capable destroyers to Spain, and missile defense assets generally to Europe. The commitment should continue and be expanded. Patrols in the Arctic and the Eastern Mediterranean should be increased, and US participation across a variety of NATO training missions should be redoubled.
Commercially, the pillars of the Russian regime should be undermined. The US is poised to become a net energy exporter due to fracking and natural gas; it should.
John Kerry: “Mr. President, we’ve just received a message from some of the protesters in Ukraine.”
President Obama: “What’s it say?”
John Kerry: “All it says is, ‘Tanks’.”
President Obama: “Tell them, they’re welcome.”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/02/28/Flashback-Palin-Mocked-in-2008-for-Warning-Putin-May-Invade-Ukraine-if-Obama-Elected-President
“As Bill Kristol remarked last week, we can recover from any domestic policy President Obama enacts. After he leaves office we can repeal Obamacare and shrink the deficit. But the damage the President can still do to our standing in the world?”
Did Bill Kristol really say that? To me, it sounds so silly, it must have been an off the cuff remark he didn’t think about very much. I’m afraid, though, that he really means it.
This perfectly illustrates the problem with neocon thinking. Kristol is all worried about our “standing in the world” while declaring that shrinking the deficit and repealing Obamacare is a cinch.
He thinks the cart is pulling the horse. He thinks the US government is responsible to the world, not America. He thinks he can shrink domestic spending without shrinking the military-industrial complex. He thinks America should be as involved in the Crimea as Russia is.
OK here is what we should threaten Russia with right now. First if they don’t pull their soldiers/mercenaries out of Crimea we will move to exclude them from the G8/20, we will stop giving visas to Russians, and deport all current Russian travelers to the US, we will also freeze the assets of any Russian State Company/politician in the US. We can further move against them by declaring open support for Chechnyan independence. We will also move to promote reunification of Moldova to Romania, and redeploy missile defense in Eastern Europe, along with a strong anti air system. We will also move US military bases East into Poland and Romania, and move US war ships into the Black Sea to be stationed in Romania or Turkey. All this we are free to do. All of these things will hurt Russian and undermine it goals/desires, none of them involve bombing anyone.
This is pathetic, and scary. How much is Obama willing to give to Putin? Is there even an actual line beyond which even Obama will not be pushed? I don’t see what it is. Will Russia now take Belarus, will they try to take Moldova? Will we give them Latvia, Estonia or Lithuania? ·9 hours ago
Edited 8 hours ago
Obama is Putin’s lawn jockey.
President Obama: “What’s it say?”
John Kerry: “All it says is, ‘Tanks’.”
President Obama: “Tell them, they’re welcome.” ·28 minutes ago
I wonder if those tanks will have a reset buttons with a big H on them? Thanks HRC.
Did Bill Kristol really say that? To me, it sounds so silly, it must have been an off the cuff remark he didn’t think about very much. I’m afraid, though, that he really means it.
This perfectly illustrates the problem with neocon thinking. Kristol is all worried about our “standing in the world” while declaring that shrinking the deficit and repealing Obamacare is a cinch.
He thinks the cart is pulling the horse. He thinks the US government is responsible to the world, not America. He thinks he can shrink domestic spending without shrinking the military-industrial complex. He thinks America should be as involved in the Crimea as Russia is. ·21 minutes ago
In Bill’s defense, it was indeed an off-the-cuff remark. That said, though, I believed he’d stand on his suggestion that repairing the domestic catastrophe will prove easier than repairing the damage Obama can still do internationally.
When has Obama ever exhibited moral concern for white people who don’t vote for him? Odds are, he doesn’t care about Ukrainian lives or their freedom.
Perhaps his ego means he would like to be able to stop Putin for fame’s sake. But he will sell out the Ukrainians in a heartbeat if Putin offers him anything interesting.
Obama is a totalitarian wannabe. He doesn’t even care about his own people. Do you think he cares about some white people halfway around the world in a country most Americans couldn’t even place on a map?
Mead is right. President Obama is planning a performance, not an intervention.
unless the American people repudiate Barack Obama in November, 2014.
Peter, remember Jimmy Carter!
There is a road up from here. ·1 hour ago
I’m not seeing Jimmy Carter, here. I’m seeing Neville Chamberlain.
First Georgia, now Ukraine; the Russians apparently need living space.
Edit: Got the quote wrong.
Per Caroline Glick:
“From Russia to Iran, from Israel to the Far East, Obama’s foreign policy calls for the US to appease its adversaries at the expense of its allies. At its core, it is informed by the belief that the reason the US has adversaries is because it has allies.
Full essay here:
http://carolineglick.com/rousing-the-americans-from-their-slumber/