On the Contrary

In the last few blogs on the economy I have pointed out how conservative thinking on the economy is outmoded and as a result is the cause of many of the problems we are now facing.  The same is true for our approach to foreign affairs and that was on display during the Russian incursion into Georgia.   John McCain came out with a bellicose, “We are all Georgians” and Sarah Palin with her statement that we might have to confront them militarily.  It is vintage 1980’s stuff that is totally removed from where the world is today.

I have maintained in earlier blogs (”John McCain Experience?” and “Ticking Time Bombs”) that the reaction exhibited by John McCain and the conservatives is cold war thinking that has not evolved as the world has changed.  My contention is that Russia may find, as we did in Iraq, that these kinds of expeditionary adventures are extremely expensive and counter productive.  While the Neocons are seeing Russia as this big monolithic threat that must be met at the door, many others are understanding this will only exacerbate things when a more cool and calculated response will be much more effective.

First and foremost this was an exercise of Russian power near their borders on what they see as an ever-increasing United States threat.  How would you feel if Russia put missiles on our borders as we are doing in Turkey?  Oh, I forgot, they did and it was the Cuban missile crisis.  Secondly have you ever asked yourself what NATO does anymore and wouldn’t you be threatened by the expansion around your borders.  Of course Russia’s move was thuggish although goaded on by Georgia’s imprudent acts in that volatile region.  It is also funded by their oil wealth which we are contributing to.  But the reality is that it was counter productive.  Consider what Fareed Zakaria said on his show GPS:

“From Caucasian countries like Azerbaijan, to Poland and Ukraine, to the Baltic republics, everyone has been rattled by Russia’s behavior, and now seek stronger ties with the West.  Europe and the United States are more united than at any point in two decades. And outside the West, no country in the world has followed Russia and recognized South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Moscow must be looking at all this and realizing that it has racked up huge costs for little benefit.

If there were to be another cold war, the outcome is preordained. The combined GDP of the West is now $30 trillion. Russia, meanwhile, has an economy that is just under $2 trillion, and that, too, artificially inflated by high oil prices.”

Consider what Tom Friedman (“Hot, Flat, and Crowded”) said in an interview on the same show one week later:

“For me, as someone who opposed NATO expansion at the time, because I felt that it was basically saying to the Russians, look, the Cold War is over for you, but not for us. We’re going to keep pushing our alliance in your face.

At the time they were weak. And at the time, you know, the administration told us, oh, don’t worry. The Russians — they’ll accept it. They’ll get used to it.

Well, guess what. They got strong, and they were never used to it. It was a humiliation. And so, it doesn’t surprise me to see what Putin is doing today.

It’s not an excuse. Putin’s got to get out of Georgia. I think the market’s actually going to punish him a lot more than he realizes and a lot of others realize.”

The bottom line here is that John McCain’s “experienced” response, reflective of the conservative’s view of world politics, is the wrong approach that will simply make things worse.  We need to understand that the Russians have real concerns we need to not just flip off.  Second we need to understand that in a world economy, Russia’s thugism will have negative consequences for the Russians.  The last thing we need to do is start another cold war to reinforce their thugism.  Even more important, we need Russia on our side.  As Tom Friedman put it:

“I looked at the world and I said, is there any problem in the world that we can solve without Russia? Any big problem, whether it’s Iran, Iraq — is there any problem we could solve without Russia?”

Our policy in the future is not reliving the past which is what the conservative Republicans will bring us, but looking for new ways to deal with aggression in a world where that aggression is becoming more and more counter productive as our economies and the welfare of our people are more and more entwined.  Or as Fareed said,

“A calm and deliberate policy toward Moscow is what the world needs, not hysterical overreactions.”

We are not all Georgians.

There are three major stories that have our attention from American’s point of view in the realm of foreign affairs:  They are the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, and the Russian invasion of Georgia.  The conventional wisdom on this (Republican and Media) is that the surge is working in Iraq, Afghanistan needs more troops to quell the Taliban uprising, and Russia may be reverting to Cold War behavior and must be stopped.  All of these are wrong.

First let’s take Iraq:  John McMean has been saying that he will win that war and bring our troops home victorious.  Political implication is Barack wants to lose it by bringing our troops home early and in defeat.  It’s bogus, but that is for another day.  Iraq is a ticking time bomb.  Nothing has been resolved and the Sunnis are being denied any real role in the military and police forces, much less government.  We are simply paying them off, hence the decrease in violence, but the promised inclusiveness into the ruling Shiite government has not occurred.  I would recommend you read Leila Fadel”s of McClatchy News story, “Former Sunni militants find job door closed” that appeared in the Sacramento Bee (sorry I can’t find a link).  The war is about power jockeying among Shiites, and the sectarian conflict and disenfranchisement of the Sunnis.  Nothing has changed and time is running out for reconciliation.  As one Sunni put it, “If they disband us now, I will tell you that history will show we will go back to zero.  I will not give up my weapons.  I will never give them up, and I will carry my weapon again.  If it is useless to talk to the government, I will be forced to carry my weapons and my pistol.”  So as John McMean promises you victory and stay the course, all I hear is “tick, tick, tick”.  Ask yourself why we remain embroiled in an 8th century cultural war?

Afghanistan, by all measures, is degenerating as the violence increases.  Both candidates are promising to increase our troop presence there.  Here is my question:  More troops to do what?  We have already been occupying the country for seven years.  What is the long term strategy for once again taming an 8th century culture?  If the strategy is more troops, for how long, to do what, and what is the end game?  Somewhere in all of this we need to step back and re-evaluate our strategic priorities.  Whether Afghanistan is a democracy or a theist state is really irrelevant.  Whether they produce poppies for income is irrelevant.  What is important is that it is not a beachhead for al-Qaeda and attacks on the rest of the civilized world.  Once again we are bogged down in the wars of a very backward people that is going to go on for a very long time.  Our strategic goal should be to make sure that they are not a threat to the world and move on to more important conflicts and issues and not be tied down there.  Ask yourself this:  If we could attack, mostly with air power and route the Taliban in a very few days back in 2001, why isn’t that a good strategy forward instead of a 50 or 100 year commitment to nation building?  If we put more troops in there without a long-term plan, what I hear is “tick, tick, tick”.

Finally we have Russia and what to do about their belligerent behavior.  Well what I see is the same arrogance that we exhibited when we invaded Iraq.  There is a silver lining is this thing.  First and foremost, America and Europe have finally come to their senses about who Putin is.  Second, right now Russia is rich in oil money and thinks it can afford to try to reestablish its old Soviet Union influence.  They learned nothing from their incursion into Afghanistan, as we didn’t in our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Now they think they can project their power through brute force in other countries.  These countries are not going to sit idly by while their nationalism is tramped upon.  Resistances will arise, and the cost to Russia will become immense to maintain this level of control.  Like us, they will find that it saps their power and their wealth to invade and occupy another country.  We don’t need to start another cold war and we certainly cannot afford an armed conflict.  So John McMean, sit down and shut up.  We need to take prudent diplomatic actions in unison with the European Union that makes Russia pay a price in the Western world for their actions.  I wonder if there are any assets we could seize through the World Court (of course we would have to recognize it) to cover the cost of the humanitarian aid?  We need to support the break-away countries to stand tall and join the West in developing strong economies.  This doesn’t mean encourage belligerent action like that of Georgia that set off this whole thing.  I wonder if John McMean has a conscious or feels any responsibility for any of this?  Sooner or later Russia will start to feel the pain and relent as its people start to grumble. On the other hand if we start another cold war it will mobilize the Russian people behind Putin.   It is not the 80’s and the world has tasted freedom and nationalism.  You can’t put the genie back in the bottle.  In this case, the short term victory in Georgia is the ticking time bomb for Russia.

So we have a choice, we can continue what we have been doing, as John McMean proposes, or we can recognize what our real interests are and quit fighting battles from the last century.  It is the difference in whether you think experience is looking backwards and applying old solutions to old problems, or is it learning from our mistakes and looking forward for new solutions.

I was watching CNN on Monday trying to find out what was going on in Georgia with the invasion by the Russians and what I got was John McMean looked more Presidential today than Barrack did as he released a get tough paper on Russia.  Let’s see if I have this right:  Russia has invaded Georgia and I, probably like a lot of people in this country, have ignored the politics over there and now I would like to know what the background is that led up to this invasion.  And what I got was an analysis of how this event could work in John McMean’s political favor because he can show off his foreign affairs credentials and a discussion of who looked more Presidential, McMean in suit and tie framed by flags, and Barrack on vacation in Hawaii, in a casual shirt.  The stand-in for Wolfe Blitzer turns to the Republican shill and asks if this doesn’t help McMean.  Does anybody in the nation not know what his answer will be?  This is news? This informs the American public?  Are we really that stupid?

But Keith Olbermann on Countdown actually had someone on his show that knew the history and intimated that we had emboldened the Georgians to provoke the Russians.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the next couple of days as we look at our policies in that region and the helpless state we are in right now to do anything about it.  But CNN is showing John McMean with his forceful statement and describing how presidential he looks.  Uh, wait a minute.  Do you guys remember when Barrack went to Europe and the McMean folks were all over him for being presumptuous about acting like a President?  Does it occur to anyone that in a developing crisis maybe we ought to let the President be the President and maybe John McMean was well, being presumptuous, and also undercutting the sitting President?  Oh I am sorry those would be Republican complaints about a Democrat, not an observation about Republicans.

But did our media even notice?  I only witnessed Olbermann pointing out these obvious hypocrisies.  A real press would have informed us of the history that led up to this invasion.  It would have informed us about our arming of the Georgians.  It would have told us about the Georgian’s earlier aggression that started this fray. It would also inform us about the fact that we are powerless to do anything about the current incursion by the Russians because the policies of the Republicans have tied our hands and stripped us of our influence.  The Russians are rich with oil money and they can do just about anything they want.  It is sad to see them reverting to the Soviet Union of old.  But then again we looked in their eyes and knew them to be men of virtue didn’t we?

So while this is going on, the lead stories were of course more discussion of John Edward’s indiscretions, Hillary’s followers threats to disrupt the Democratic convention, and stories about some of the infighting that went on in the Clinton campaign about how to tar Barrack un-American.  I don’t know about you, but I already feel better informed about tax policy (McMean issued an ad that was totally false, but the press was too busy looking under John Edward’s bed to notice), health care, our crumbling infrastructure, a real Iraq policy, what to do in Afghanistan, how to handle our energy future, or what we are going to do about global warming.   Actually what I am better informed about is who made payments to Edward’s girl friend.  Is this a great way to run a country or what?  And we are surprised that the voters continue to make colossally bad choices on their ballots?  Maybe that is why drill, drill, drill sells.  Our press is no longer redeemable.  They are just pretty faces without any gray matter to look beyond the statements of their guests.  Anybody have a blow dryer?

One last thought:  If you look at John McMean’s six point plan for dealing with the Georgia situation (i.e. dealing with Russia), it is the old isolation is punishment approach.  My first reaction was, “Yeah, slap those guys back into place.” But it hasn’t worked in the past and one might wonder if just maybe we need to be engaging them more in the world so they are less estranged and less inclined to act like the old Soviet Union. Another point of view (instead of John McMean’s knee jerk reaction) showed up from ex-President Gorbachev in the Washington Post.  It will make an interesting topic for discussion of policy in the future if we can finally focus on what is important instead of what is salacious.  What do you think the odds are we will actually have that discussion?

Tuesday Update:  It is not getting any better.  There has been some recognition that just maybe we encouraged Georgia to move boldly and foolishly against Russia so maybe we will have an adult discussion of this problem.  But then Nancy Pelosi said on the drilling issue that she might consider a vote on limited drilling if we put a lot of other things on the table, and CNN’s blown dry hair set’s reaction was, “Flip-flop”, and “score one for John McCain”.  With this kind of press characterizing a move to try to compromise and find middle ground as losing, why would politician dare risk ever compromising?  They are all scum and should apply to Entertainment Tonight where their limited skills might be better suited.  There was one bright spot:  David Schuster stood in for Chris, I’ll never let you finish your answer, Mathews on Hardball and knew his subject so his interviewees could not dodge their perveracations.  It was refreshing.  He is diffinitely a candidate to host Meet the Press.