Jim Stillman
Nevar
The “Cold War” redux: Provocation without Purpose!
September 2nd 2008 00:12
A nation must do whatever is in its own national interest, regardless of world opinion, although the latter is part of the formula for determining the former. The issue posed by the Bush (43) administration is whether the United States foreign policy has been kidnapped by a group of neo-conservatives which is determined to flex our military muscle even if (1) the military has been so spread that it’s muscle is limited; (2) the United States threatens relations with allies whose support is necessary in combating world-wide terrorism and in other endeavors; and (3) we resume the era of the Soviet-U.S. “cold war” which we had won over 25 years ago. Added to this mix is a president willing to acquiesce, determined to be more of a warrior than his father and intellectually incapable to recognize that he is being manipulated.
Russia had used naked aggression against Georgia, an independent free sovereign country formerly a part of the U.S.S.R. The reason for the entry into Georgia was a dispute over two small areas in which the majority was ethnic Russians. The incursion was wrong and was condemned by most of the world, including the United States, and, in fact, the Russian troops have withdrawn or will have withdrawn.
The point is that, at a time when Russian-U.S. relations are severely strained and at a time when cooperation with Russia is needed, the United States decided to place missiles in Poland, another country formerly in the Soviet sphere of influence. In the early years of the Kennedy administration, Russia’s placement of missiles in Cuba became a casus belli. Is there any wonder that the Russians are feeling threatened? Do we really need to increase the level of hostility?
Perhaps the deployment of missiles is vital to our security or there are other substantial and valid reasons that make the action worth the consequences. Perhaps, however, we have entered into a series of treaties that are not in our best and selfish interests and establish obligations we simply are incapable of meeting. We have, for example, encouraged the expansion of NATO to include nations that had been Soviet client states, such as Poland. One of the results is that we are committed to come to the defense of these countries if they are attacked or threatened.
Several aspects of the Polish missile installation are important.
First, the “official” position of the United States is that the missiles are not related to any tension with Russia; they are designed to counter threats from “rogue states” as Iran and North Korea. Upon signing the agreement, Secretary Rice said this is not a provocation to Russia, it isn‘t even a defensive gesture in response to Russia.
Fact check: Neither Iran nor North Korea have any missiles that can get to Poland; even if for some reason they decided to build some, Iranians don‘t have any political disagreements with Poland. That‘s like putting in a missile defense shield in Michigan to protect against Nevada!
In fact, Poland feels that the missiles are there to counter Russian force; Russia agrees.
The US and Poland had been talking about the missile shield for a year but rushed to cement their alliance in the wake of the invasion of Georgia by Russia. The Polish Defense Minister, Bogdgan Klich, referring to the Georgian conflict, said,
Mr. Klich said that Poland and America were "really at the finish line of these talks", hinting that Washington was finally prepared to meet Polish security demands in return for housing the silo. He added that the invasion of Georgia had proved that Russia " isn't a stable partner and continues to consider its international surroundings as its exclusive sphere of influence."
The Russians have called the missiles in Poland a direct provocation against them. Is this what we truly want? Remember, if you will, the Cuban missiles and our reaction and concern.
Russia cannot be faulted for feeling the same way.
Russia had used naked aggression against Georgia, an independent free sovereign country formerly a part of the U.S.S.R. The reason for the entry into Georgia was a dispute over two small areas in which the majority was ethnic Russians. The incursion was wrong and was condemned by most of the world, including the United States, and, in fact, the Russian troops have withdrawn or will have withdrawn.
The point is that, at a time when Russian-U.S. relations are severely strained and at a time when cooperation with Russia is needed, the United States decided to place missiles in Poland, another country formerly in the Soviet sphere of influence. In the early years of the Kennedy administration, Russia’s placement of missiles in Cuba became a casus belli. Is there any wonder that the Russians are feeling threatened? Do we really need to increase the level of hostility?
Perhaps the deployment of missiles is vital to our security or there are other substantial and valid reasons that make the action worth the consequences. Perhaps, however, we have entered into a series of treaties that are not in our best and selfish interests and establish obligations we simply are incapable of meeting. We have, for example, encouraged the expansion of NATO to include nations that had been Soviet client states, such as Poland. One of the results is that we are committed to come to the defense of these countries if they are attacked or threatened.
Several aspects of the Polish missile installation are important.
First, the “official” position of the United States is that the missiles are not related to any tension with Russia; they are designed to counter threats from “rogue states” as Iran and North Korea. Upon signing the agreement, Secretary Rice said this is not a provocation to Russia, it isn‘t even a defensive gesture in response to Russia.
“This is an agreement that of course will establish a missile defense site here in Poland, a missile defense site that will help us to deal with the new threat to the 21st century from long-range missile threats from countries like Iran or from North Korea.”
Fact check: Neither Iran nor North Korea have any missiles that can get to Poland; even if for some reason they decided to build some, Iranians don‘t have any political disagreements with Poland. That‘s like putting in a missile defense shield in Michigan to protect against Nevada!
In fact, Poland feels that the missiles are there to counter Russian force; Russia agrees.
The US and Poland had been talking about the missile shield for a year but rushed to cement their alliance in the wake of the invasion of Georgia by Russia. The Polish Defense Minister, Bogdgan Klich, referring to the Georgian conflict, said,
"We feel at the moment a greater concern for our safety. That’s why every installation of the Western world on the Polish territory has its meaning, because it anchors Poland more deeply to the West."
Mr. Klich said that Poland and America were "really at the finish line of these talks", hinting that Washington was finally prepared to meet Polish security demands in return for housing the silo. He added that the invasion of Georgia had proved that Russia " isn't a stable partner and continues to consider its international surroundings as its exclusive sphere of influence."
The Russians have called the missiles in Poland a direct provocation against them. Is this what we truly want? Remember, if you will, the Cuban missiles and our reaction and concern.
Russia cannot be faulted for feeling the same way.
| 70 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Jeff Musall
Comment by Stephen 7
Comment by Jeff Musall