How quickly conservatives returned to Cold War rhetoric and attitudes in the wake of the Russia-Georgia conflict was astonishing.
Putin's Russia is an aggressive, nationalistic power. And that's a problem.
But Putin's Russia isn't the Soviet Union. It doesn't represent the same kind of threat to the West. The stakes just aren't the same, which means that Cold War attitudes don't lead to clear-headed thinking about how best to respond to the problem Russia does present
The ambitions of the communist Soviet Union were universal. It wanted to remake the world in its image.
It promoted the spread of communism throughout the globe. It actively sought to undermine Western democracies, particularly in Western Europe. It posed a military threat to the independence of Western Europe.
It's remarkable for Robb to write this knowing what he has seen over the last week and a half. The world has been decidedly non confrontational with Russia and what it has created is an every growing disaster.
Of course, all historic analogies have limitations, however the suggestion that there are more differences between Putin's Russia and the Soviet Union than similarities is ludicrous nonsense. It's the same Vladimir Putin that called the break up of the Soviet Union the greatest geopolitical disaster of the 20th century. No situation is exactly the same as one compared to history but this one is remarkably similar. Robb continues with more nonsense.
Vladimir Putin has emasculated nascent democratic institutions in post-Soviet Russia. He has successfully turned Russia's oil and natural gas resources into an instrument of state power. Putin's Russia seeks power and influence.
But there is no evidence that Putin's Russia aims to remake the world in its image. Instead, it is seeking safe space for its authoritarianism.
It perceives itself threatened by Western powers who believe that legitimacy comes only from the sort of democratic expressions Putin has suppressed. That is why it reacts so adversely to NATO nestling up to its borders.
By nascent Democratic institutions I suppose Robb means the elimination of all private free media, all opposition parties, and installed his crony Medvedev as President when his term ended in an orchestrated attempt to consolidate power into his own hands. Furthermore, as Russian tanks roll throughout Georgia in an attempt to overthrow the Democratically elected government and install a puppet government Robb has the chutzpah to say that Putin isn't attempting to remake the world in his image. In fact, that's exactly what he is attempting in Georgia.
Yes, Russia has succesfully used the skyrocketing price of oil to expand its economy exponentially, so what. That is a reason for concern not congratulations. Robb's madness continues.
Putin's Russia has sought economic leverage to constrain Western Europe, and pretty successfully so. Europe gets 25 percent of its natural gas from Russia. The figures are even higher for countries such as Germany and Italy.
However, Russia, unlike the Soviet Union, poses no military threat to Western Europe. It probably poses no military threat to most of Eastern Europe either, although the one good thing that came out of the Georgian conflict was the willingness of the United States to provide Patriot missile defenses to Poland.
Russia's true military and economic threat, unlike that of the Soviet Union, is geographically constrained largely to the countries that immediately border it.
How Robb comes to the conclusion that Russia poses no military threat to Western Europe or most of Eastern Europe is a total mystery? Furthermore, he acknowledges that they pose an economic threat, their overwhelming supply of energy, that gives them natural military leverage and doesn't explain how to deal with that threat. Furthermore, Does Robb really believe that Putin is through building up his military? Whatever threat he poses now, doesn't Robb realize that the threat will be exponentially greater in five years? Robb continues.
Many of those countries do not want to be in the Russian orbit. They want to align and integrate themselves with the West.
That's important, and it matters. But what the West can do to give these countries some living space independent of Russia is difficult to fathom.
Neither the United States nor particularly Western Europe is going to get into a shooting war with Russia over these border countries. That means that bringing them into NATO simply renders the already confused mission of that military alliance even more confused.
John McCain was right that Russia should have never been invited to join the G-7, turning it into the G-8. But what would booting it out really accomplish?
And in these four paragraphs, Robb, unintentionally, points out the fallacy of diplomacy with Russia. He acknowledges that booting Russia out of the G8 does nothing substantial. He acknowledges that the West has no will to take on Putin militarily, and thus, Russian tanks continue to roll through Georgia and they will until the government falls and a puppet is installed. Yet, as he says all this, Robb proclaims that it is confrontation that won't work. In fact, his own admissions point to the idea that it is diplomacy without the real threat of force that won't work.
If the West won't get into a shooting war over Georgia, at what point will we? When Putin rolls into the Ukraine, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, or France? Until we confront him, he will continue to roll his tanks from one country to another continuously growing in strength. This is the exact same mistake that the world made with Hitler and that cost 20 million plus lives.
Robb then continues to point out that it is useless to kick Russia out of the WTO. Then, he finishes with this remarkable statement.
Nevertheless, despite all those compelling predicates, a confrontational strategy just doesn't seem to have anyplace useful to go.
Actually, in my humble opinion, Mr. Robb, because of all of these compelling predicates, it appears confrontation is the only viable alternative. This analysis is amateurish to the point of ludicrous and from someone that supposedly has been around. Never, throughouth the piece, does he offer an alternative to confrontation. In fact, all he does is point out the utter counter productive nature of all diplomatic actions. He shows no way forward besides confrontation, and then proclaims that confrontation "doesn't seem to have anyplace useful to go".
Actually, it does Mr. Robb. Vladimir Putin is a bully. It is not very much different than any playground at any school. Bullies rule by fear. The only way to stop a bully is to confront them. The world can ignore and cajole Putin, but unfortunately, the only way to stop him is to confront him.
No comments:
Post a Comment