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.
Quote of the Day: Are We Winners or Losers?
Winning means getting Russia to withdraw from Syria, the Donbas and Crimea. A diplomatic victory is when China agrees to dismantle military bases on artificial islands in the South China Sea. Success involves getting Iran to stop arming and funding armed militias and terrorist groups in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iraq.
Losing, on the other hand, is something the West has become quite good at. Losing is watching construction continue on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline as Russia declares the country’s largest opposition party an illegal conspiracy. Losing is moaning about Chinese behavior in the South China Sea as the military balance tilts toward Beijing. Losing is crafting intricate webs of ineffectual sanctions as Russia’s reach and control inexorably expand. Losing is wringing one’s hands and issuing eloquent critiques as China intensifies its crackdowns in Tibet, Hong Kong and Xinjiang.
–Walter Russell Mead
Mr. Mead was reflecting on the ineptness of the Biden administration and the President’s empty and meaningless remarks at the G7 summit. Nothing Biden said demonstrated any resolve or strategy to hold our enemies accountable. Everyone seemed to love what Biden had to say, but as usual, his remarks were all words and no substance.
As we look ahead in the Biden Presidency, is there any hope that he will take a strong position on anything? Does he genuinely believe that his words will have any impact, aside from receiving polite applause from the political Left and his partners at the summit? Will people figure out that he only offers meaningless rhetoric?
Just like Obama, he will draw red lines, make threats and use an ominous tone in his criticisms of our enemies.
And no one will take him seriously.
Published in Group Writing
And so we would rather Russia just get deeper into bed with China? Look I am of Polish descent, but I really fail to see how basically this dumb ‘cold war’ with Russia is anyway of interest to the West at all.
We should be doing everything possible to help get them out of bed with China and back into the western sphere. We should be doing our best to integrate them into the economy and make them more dependent on Germany and the west which that pipeline does.
Bringing in Russia only strengthens those partners not weakens them. Integrating Russia and making them a proper trade partner and making them a security friend as opposed to an enemy would be for the best for everyone in the neighborhood, except for maybe Raytheon and defense contractors.
Oh, yes, Biden will take a very strong position on the “climate crisis”, and along with the UN and the WHO, will attempt to virtually shut down the US economy. They will invent a “climate emergency” and use it to ban fossil fuels for transportation, heating, and power generation, effectively bringing US society to a stop. However, the Communist Chinese will be allowed to use whatever fuels they want, to enable their takeover of the world economy.
I have read that:
Was some of this an own goal?
The people who worked to get Biden into office can’t stop congratulating themselves long enough to go “oops!”
Militarily I agree. Strategically using other resources I don’t think I agree. Obviously we need to have a strategy to take on China and that should be the focus. Nordstream was already dead. We revived it because it benefits Germany over our eastern European allies, strengthens Russia’s position in Europe and weakens our own position, which by some strange quark of fate is a key goal of democratic foreign policy. I don’t think we should focus on Russia to the exclusion of China, but there is no compelling reason to make it easier on Russia or give them freedom or movement or space to pursue their own objectives, especially given that those objectives are likely contrary to the US’s long term objectives.
Unfortunately I am not optimistic about making Russia part of the western project. It has been tried countless times and the only time it was successful was when they were facing a existential threat. Russia’s historical role in world affairs is to survey the landscape find the points of stress and weakness and then do what every is necessary to make the situation worse. Often they pursue this strategy in ways that are inimical to their own long term interests. Until Putin is out of power there isn’t going to be much opportunity to make common cause with Russia. In my judgement the best course of action is to restrict their freedom of movement enough to limit their options and opportunities for mischief.
As far as Russia and China getting into bed together. It is possible; however, I think there are historic challenges there as well. They are not and have never really been natural allies. Also Xi and Putin are both big egos and big personalities, neither is going to be willing to play a supporting role and that will hamper their cooperation somewhat, but they both view the US as their primary competition and so they will act in concert as much as they can to make our lives miserable, nothing is going to change that in the short term.
It was, but TPP was never sold to the American people. It was an elite project and we were just along for the ride. I think it was actually probably good strategy in the long run; however, It isn’t surprising that at a time when trust between the American people and the “Ruling class” is at an all time low and confidence in the American Project at home and abroad is at a low point that it was a hard sell. In the end America is a democratic republic, and so the people need to be consulted and a consensus needs to be built with them to get something like this to work. This is something it would be helpful if elites of both parties took into account.
Such victories as WRM outlines would take leadership whos priorities go beyond personal and party advancement. Even then I think such a string of success would be unlikely. I don’t see in President Biden the kind of character that would seriously attempt to achieve such goals as listed. I imagine keeping the Democrats’ in control of the senate and house dwarfs global initiatives in their mental list of priorities.
Donald Trump spent the last 4 years getting bashed by America’s elite class for standing with the people. We can now see clearly what is wrong and what needs to be done. I am yet hopeful that America will stand up and turn this around.
Dude. They are already in an alliance. The ship has sailed. This is regularly talked about in most foreign policy circles, that cover this stuff. Except for the Atlantacist hold outs who like to live in a fantasy world.
We really need to stop making our FP decisions based on 40 year old theories, that werent true then.
I’ve agreed with all your assessments, @raxxalan. I can’t imagine China and Russia working together for precisely the reasons you offer. Nor can I see the Russians ever becoming motivated to work with the West; they despise the West and like China, prefer to rule over us. Thanks for your comments!
I guess I didn’t make myself very clear. They will both work together in as much as it is possible to thwart the US and improve their overall position, because they both believe that is in their national interests. We aren’t going to change that by being nice to Russia. Until Putin is gone and we have a post cold war leadership in Russia that is really focused more internally then externally the Russians are going to continue to be a proctological problem to the US. Allowing them to get in bed with the Germans and undermine the Atlantic alliance, and isolate our allies in Eastern Europe doesn’t seam to me to be a strong play. Also as we have seen with China integrating them economically may make them more of a threat rather then less of a threat.
China is a real threat and they are happy to work with the Russians to further their interests; however, the very much see Russia as a junior partner. Putin being Putin that will rankle after a time. Xi is not going to play second fiddle to Putin, because that isn’t the type of person he is. Both are Authoritarians, neither is imbued with an abundance of trust for one another. That will limit some of their ability to cooperate. Historically Russian China relations haven’t been terrific so isn’t a long tradition of them working together. It isn’t good that they are allied; however, given the fact that they both consider the US a threat it is unlikely that we could or can do anything to stop that in the short run.
Given that the hand we were dealt I firmly agree with you that the focus should be on China. I just don’t think there is any way to finesse Russia into helping us with that. I think it is more likely that if we give them more room and resources to maneuver our global position will be weakened not strengthened. I don’t consider myself an Atlantacist but, I am a healthy Russian skeptic.
I’m afraid I think the reason was more political, but could be I guess.
It was totally political. No argument was made to the American people that this would
Americans are by nature skeptical of free trade and foreign entanglements, so it is unsurprising that politicians would play to that fear to get elected no matter what their personal feelings on the matter were. Additionally, Unfortunately there is a current practice in American politics to be against what ever the other side is for but, that isn’t the whole story because in 2016 both Clinton and Trump campaigned against it. Bipartisan flight from an issue is a sure sign that it is a political loser. As a geostrategic move I actually think it had a lot to recommend it, but it had no constituency.