…was easy to predict.
And in fact, Sarah Palin did predict it in the first campaign.
The only people who didn’t see it coming are the people we foolishly reelected last year.
[Update a while later]
From terrible to even worse:
The sequence of the past week, then, has a grim logic. Ukraine unrest builds and its pro-Russian leader gets toppled. The Sochi Olympics come to an end. The United States announces military force reductions. Putin moves to secure Russia’s sole warm-water navy base and bring Ukraine to heel. Russia knows that the United States has a security treaty with Ukraine, so the next move is very much Washington’s. Obama delivers a terse statement in which he does not characterize Russia’s move as an “invasion,” takes no press questions, and then heads off for “happy hour” and delivers a sharply partisan speech to the Democratic Party. Obama has made no effort to unify Americans ahead of what may be the most dangerous foreign policy situation since the end of the Cold War.
Putin knows that the United States is debt-ridden and war-weary. He knows that Europe is in no mood for a war and is not capable of sustaining one without the United States, and that Britain is incapable of stopping him on its own (UK is a signatory to that Ukraine security treaty). He also knows that if the U.S. abrogates its security treaty with Ukraine, then the world stops spinning around Washington and may start spinning around Moscow. He also knows that the team atop the U.S. government consists of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Kerry and Chuck Hagel. Those four hardly constitute a national security dream team. None of them have a record of consistently pursuing America’s national interests above other considerations.
I'm sure glad Obama, Biden, Kerry and Hagel are in charge of foreign policy. #ThingsNoSanePersonIsSayingToday
— Rand Simberg (@Rand_Simberg) March 1, 2014
[Update a few minutes later]
Party like it’s 1914:
everyone who understood how to confront the threat of the Soviet Union can say, “I told you so, and we knew how to handle them.” Reagan, Ed Meese, John Paul II, Caspar Weinberger, Strom Thurmond, and thousands of others who shared their moral clarity. Don’t forget, Ted Kennedy was feeding information to Soviet leaders about how to confront Ronald Reagan. Some were on the wrong side of history, some were on the right.
During this era, Obama was on the wrong side.
Again, back to the tape. Now in this digital age we have a president that is not only illiterate in the history of European confrontation, but his tendencies skew toward America’s enemies. Here’s the even scarier part: Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons to Russia in exchange for an American guarantee of security.
It’s starting to feel like 1914, and unfortunately Putin seems to be holding the best hand. America is weak and has a leader who is incompetent at best, and at worst has a history of siding with America’s enemies. Just this week, as Putin was massing force on the Ukrainian border, Jay Carney was warning Putin not to take steps that might be “misinterpreted.” Putin listened. The only place his moves were being misinterpreted was in the Obama White House. Only there, in the bubble of new-age foreign policy nonsense, was there a misinterpretation. Everyone else knew what Putin was up to, except the people we pay to know.
What a disaster the last election was, on multiple fronts.
I wonder how this ‘dream team’ of clear-headed thinkers would have dealt with the Cuban Missile Crisis?
On second thought, I don’t want to think about it.
I think we can go ahead and scrap the nuclear non-proliferation treaty as well. The security pack with the Ukraine was to encourage them to get rid of their nuclear stockpile. Seems those treaties are as useful as Charmin.
Isn’t it great how we are entirely dependent on the Russians for access to the ISS now that the Shuttle is retired? I wonder how fast Elon Musk could make a stripped down commercial crew version of the Dragon if asked.
As a side note, I wonder how many Ukrainians now regret the first Bush Administration talking them out of their nuclear weapons in the early 1990’s. A few dozen nukes would make the Russians think twice about invading them. As everyone knows the only thing Russia understands is the threat of force.
He could fly crew to ISS on the next flight if NASA wanted to.
Rand,
I suspect so, but if that is true than why is NASA spending so much on commercial crew for the next several years? Is it just that SpaceX has learned the contractor game of milking the government for every “new bolt” added to the system?
Because “safety is their highest priority.” Just ask Congress.
If, due to the Russia situation, we were put in a position where we needed manned launch capabilities ASAP, any ideas on how long it would take?
I’m assuming SpaceX is the closest to the finish line due to already having a proven LV and cargo capsule that can reenter.
So, what exactly would it take to enable Dragon to carry astronauts to and from ISS? I’m not talking an upcoming Dragon version, but the version available now. I’m thinking, at a minimum, it’d need a capacity similar to Soyuz; 3 crew.
Obviously, no launch abort system, but that’s not actually needed: shuttle didn’t have one either.
So, the bare-bones requirements are life support and crew couches? Anything I’m missing?
Couches are easy; aluminum frame and canvas would suffice.
The leaves life support. Bare bones with no recycling should be simple enough for the short durations needed. Heck… Dragon is already pressurized, so as Rand mentioned a while ago, the crew could get by with oxygen masks and bottled oxygen.
A manual control of some sort would be good, but not must-have. Perhaps the ability to link in with a laptop? But, it’s not absolutely needed.
What else is needed? I’m probably missing something.
So, if we were serious and had dire need, would it be *possible* for at least three crew to go up on a re-purposed CRX-3 (the next Dragon cargo trip to ISS) without a massive launch delay? (It’s currently scheduled for two weeks from now). And also, for crew to return on it?
Any guesses on if it’s possible (I’m not talking politically – my guess is they’d never approve it even if it meant losing ISS) and if so, how long it would take to get ready to launch if we were in need of it ASAP and willing to accept significant risk?
It could happen on next month’s flight to ISS. I’ll have a piece up on this somewhere this week.
“Is it just that SpaceX has learned”
SpaceX is probably happy to go along to get along and make money doing so but they are not the driver of the situation. NASA has much more influence. SpaceX makes money either way and because they profit under either scenario, you can’t really use profit as a motivating factor for dragging their feet.
You would have to show that they make more money with an extended development program with heavy NASA fiddling rather than what they would make doing normal operations. You also have to consider the longer they take means the less customers they have. It is in SpaceX’s best interest to bring this capability to the market as soon as they can. NASA has other interests of course.
I don’t think SpaceX is dragging their feet. I think they’re making steady progress on several fronts (crewed Dragon, Falcon Heavy, reusability) simultaneously, and want to get it right.
If you recall, before COTS Robert Bigelow was offering the America Prize for commercial crew to orbit. Its was a $50 million cash prize for the first flight and an $800 million contract for serving his habitats.
NASA came along with COTS. $250 million for the first three flights (actually they paid on two), cargo only, with most of the money awarded before the first flight and then a $1.6 billion contract for additional cargo flights with the promise of more government contracting funds.
Guess which one SpaceX went after?
As a result Bigelow Aerospace is on standby mode until firms like SpaceX get through serving the “Crown” and get around serving to the “peasant” market.
Lesson, no commercial business has the pockets deep enough to complete with taxpayer dollars.
You know the one good thing that could come out of this is Russia withdrawing from the ISS, forcing NASA and its partners to splash it for lack of “safe” human access. This would finally clear the way for Bigelow Aerospace to move forward.
SpaceX could fly a crew to ISS ASAP if the need arises. The capsule is pressurized as is because some of the cargo requires it. It also supports reentry too.
NASA are the ones who put the launch escape tower as a safety requirement. As if Shuttle ever had anything like that.
“The first Bush administration …”?
The Budapest Memorandum was signed in 1994. That was the END of the first Clinton term.
Sounds like you have BDS. = )
Nope. Matula is just straight deranged. He comments about SpaceX, because he claims to be against subsidies, and that NASA purchasing a SpaceX vehicle is a subsidy. But Matula works at a central Nevada community college, votes for Harry Reid, claims to be a classic Republican, and claims not to accept subsidies. Yet, on Harry Reid’s website, the Senator boasts of the subsidy pork he has brought home to his state, including 2 grants to Matula’s school, one that is specific to something Matula may not be a part and another being a general subsidy to students attending the school. And then, as you note, Matula likes to take political whacks at Republican politicians, which are typically a swing and a miss, but he takes the swing anyway.
When you call Matula on his BS, and he realizes he made another deranged comment, he puts a smiley face on a response the way a 2 year old announces they pooped their pants. Like this 🙂
The median republican voter now is a primary consumer for Depends.
How old are you, DN-Guy? 10? 11?
I suppose it’s no surprise that I’m very glad Obama is in charge of foreign policy today. The odds of the Ukraine situation turning into a US war would be much higher with McCain, Romney, Bolton, etc. running things.
But why would you be glad Obama is in charge of foreign policy as opposed to, say, my cat? Their understanding is about equal.
Obama Skips National Security Team Meeting on Russia, Ukraine.
Okay, my cat is probably better informed on the situation. Obama has undoubtedly been told that the Russians and Ukrainians are protesting because of an Internet video.
he has been briefed by Susan Rice and his national security team.
Wonder what Youtube video she blamed this time?
It is stupid to think the only action to stop Russia is war. But Obama can’t even use the threat of war because he has no credibility. And Obama fails to realize how Syria hurt him on this and how our other allies view his actions. Why should Japan think we will be there for them in regard to China? How about Taiwan? NATO?
A lot of our relationships involve countries doing things for us in exchange for protection. When you stop protecting them, not only does the immediate country involved stop doing things but so do all the other countries.
Obama is a wild card. We know he is capable and willing to use military force and the powers of government but the conditions in which he will use it are unclear. Obama is dangerous because he doesn’t act on established foreign policy or in national interests but rather out of ego. Obama’s every use of the power of government, at home and abroad, has been driven by ego.
All Russia has to do to keep the USA out of the situation is not make it personal for Obama.
What odds would you give there not even *being* a “Ukraine situation” today if any of those three were managing foreign policy?
It’s absurd to expect that all things would be equal up to this point had either of the past two presidential elections gone differently. The “Ukraine situation” can’t be separated from the broader context of feckless American diplomacy and foreign policy blundering.
“I suppose it’s no surprise that I’m very glad Obama is in charge of foreign policy today.”
Given that the situation in Ukraine is due explicity to Obama’s horrid, feckless, stupid, groveling, mindless foreign policy, I can easily see why you’d be happy he’s in charge.
This is what happens when a President’s words have no meaning. There are any numbers of actions that could have been taken short of all out war but it requires a President with credibility. Obama can’t point to Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Egypt or anywhere else and say that the USA standing by its allies during tough times are reasons for Russia to stay out of Ukraine. Obama can’t even learn from his past mistakes or maybe he just doesn’t care because he wants America weaker and views the Pax Americana as a bad thing.
It also upholds the US tradition of weak presidents getting us into bad foreign policy situations.
Actually the big question is how Poland, the Baltic Republics and Germany react. None will want to see Russia reconquering their old Eastern Europe lands and are not likely to stand by passively if it does start the process.
Also, although Ukraine did give up its nukes it didn’t give up its engineers and their industrial base. You have to wonder how long it would take them to rejoin the club and give the Russians a surprise. Remember at the time it gave them up it was the third largest nuclear power, not a third world wannabe.
“Actually the big question is how Poland, the Baltic Republics and Germany react. None will want to see Russia reconquering their old Eastern Europe lands”
They rely on the USA. When you take the USA out of the equation, it makes it less likely that they will do much of anything.
Think of it like this. Not only would the USA not help them, we might even act against them.
Bingo. The EU isn’t going to do anything militarily, because they had to call on Big Nanny in the White House to hold their hand just to bomb Libya. They’ve relied on the US military for decades, and run theirs down to the point where the UK is now building aircraft carriers that will have no aircraft.
They’re not even a paper tiger any more.
None will want to see Russia reconquering their old Eastern Europe lands and are not likely to stand by passively if it does start the process.
Oh I think it will be a cold day in hell before that happens, although it might be in Putin’s wildest wet dreams. The first Russian boot that attempts to cross any border and NATO Article 5 will be invoked, plus the Kaliningrad exclave will get real dark, real cold and real hungry real fast.
An unprecedented special meeting of the leaders of all major political parties in Poland occurred at Noon CET on Sunday (2 March) for 2.5 hours in Warsaw. After the meeting reference was made to the now prophetic comments made in 2008 by then Polish President Lech Kaczynski about the attack on Georgia: “najpierw Gruzja, potem Ukraina, potem być może Polska” or ” First Georgia , then Ukraine , then perhaps Poland.”
There is no trust between Warsaw and Moscow, it spans a thousand years of history.
the big question is how Poland, the Baltic Republics and Germany react
Them and what army? The Russians stationed 150 000 troops near the border. They have nukes too.
I know the German and Polish war material reasonably well. Not prepared for large troops deployments abroad. Take the Germans Eurofighter for example. They chose the cheapest package they could. It has crap bombardment support. Mostly good for air to air. The keep saying they will order tons of units, more than anyone else, whenever a new project comes up. But when R&D is over they are usually 3rd in number of units actually ordered.
All those countries put together have less population than Russia. That should be enough to tell you who would win the war even if the Russians had no nukes.
The best thing Europe can do is trade sanctions. Trying to win a war with a multiple nation army? Remember how the Battle of France went? That’s what typically happens.
neither Russia nor Europe are equipped for a war with each other.
Russia lacks the logistics capability for long range combat anymore.
Europe never had it.
The Americans are mostly shot after 10 years of a Bush-Obama war.
While China may want to see, the US/EU and Russia square off, it’s unlikely.
As an aside, I think these sorts of moves are more akin to Bismarck’s aggressive foreign policy maneuvering than the clowns running Germany in 1914 (though if Russia invades more of the Ukraine, my opinion will change). For example, Bismarck successfully invaded southern Denmark in 1864 to secure the heavily German duchies of Schleswig and Holstein. I don’t know if it was planned that far back, but within 25 years of the conclusion of that war, construction of the militarily significant Kiel Canal started.
In comparison, I feel Putin’s aggressive moves are similar because they are similarly narrow in scope with a significant strategic objective, the port of Sevastopol. It forces potential foes to weigh whether they want to get involved for a limited provocation and in turn gives the highest return for the gamble.
Though apparently he’s using a huge bike gang and unflagged military troops to pull this off, which is not at all like Bismarck.
1914 was widely considered a war of mistake, and a war that also broke europe and the
tsars.
say a fight starts in the Ukraine and the US goes it alone, we need greece and turkey to
allow ships into the Black Sea, and we need permission to use Incirlik and Aviano to
launch strikes. Maybe we neutralize the russian black sea fleet, maybe we lose ships.
If Nato goes in with us, will they send troops to cross Greece and refight the Crimean War?
Europe also buys a lot of NatGas from Russia, so it’s a real problem.
Our tools are far more limited, we encourage the ukranians and we use diplomatic and
financial measures. Maybe we let volunteers go, like in Syria. Maybe Wodun will volunteer
for this war.
“and a war that also broke europe”
Europe was in a constant state of war going back before the dawn of recorded history when modern humans were mixing it up with each other and Neandthals.
“Europe also buys a lot of NatGas from Russia, so it’s a real problem.”
And how can we counter that considering our current environmental dogma?
“Our tools are far more limited, we encourage the ukranians and we use diplomatic and
financial measures.”
We wont even use those. For one thing our diplomats have no credibility. No one believes what they say or trusts their promises. Obama doesn’t even understand our economy so don’t hold your breath waiting for him to use economics as a weapon against anyone but his own people.
“Maybe Wodun will volunteer
for this war.”
I said there were other options besides war but that not even the threat of war would work because Obama has been getting worked over by Russia for his entire presidency. The use of the military is an extension of foreign policy and that doesn’t always mean war. It is too bad that Obama doesn’t realize this or perhaps he does which doesn’t say much for the choices he has made.
Our tools are far more limited, we encourage the ukranians and we use diplomatic and
financial measures. Maybe we let volunteers go, like in Syria. Maybe Wodun will volunteer for this war.
Given who would likely be leading this hypothetical war, it would be foolish to volunteer. The primary limit on the tools is as wodun noted, their credibility and competence. And there would have to be a lot more compelling national interest at stake (such as the survival of the US and my family) before I’d follow a Secretary of Defense Hagel or a President Obama into such a war.
In the 1930’s Volunteers from around the world went to spain to support the
Republican government and fight the Nazis.
I don’t recall any of these volunteers working for any government.
However it would require you taking risk
How many American soldiers are you prepared to see die to keep Russia out of Ukraine? If the answer isn’t “a lot” then our options are limited.
How many Ukrainians do you think should die before you give a damn about their plight? I realize the few million Stalin killed wasn’t enough to get 20th Century Progressives to give a damn, so I expect your number is very high.
Options are always limited. That doesn’t mean there are none.
Rand – what options do we have?
When there was a Republican President in office, Democrats demanded he go the UN and explain the reasons for war to the Security Council when they already had dozens of violated resolutions on the books. At least Obama or Rice could ask Putin to explain to the Security Council why he needs Russian troops in the Crimea. Isn’t this the reason the UN exists?
Alas, we know who Obama considers the enemy.
Go after the Russian oligarchs’ finances, install missile defenses in Poland, start fracking like crazy to knock down the price of oil, airlift military equipment to eastern Europe…
Basically, stop pretending that the Cold War is over.
I suggest one more for Rand’s list; approve the Keystone oil pipeline. (that, like removing most of the fracking roadblocks, would lower the global oil prices within hours.)
If we stop pretending the Cold War is over, then we should consider how the US responded to the USSR’s use of troops in East Germany in 1953, Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, etc. For one thing, we didn’t airlift military equipment.
—
Also: Rand, last week, you seemed pretty happy with the prospect of partitioning the Ukraine. The Russian-leaning part was always going to be dominated by Russia, so if you don’t like Russia’s activities in Crimea this week, I think it is a case of being careful about what you wish for.
I don’t recall saying that it should be done via a Russian invasion.
We’re already installing missile defenses in Europe – it’s called AEGIS Ashore and unlike the crap we were trying to pawn off under Bush it works.
We’re already fracking like crazy and the price of oil isn’t moving down that much. Probably because demand is up and fracking isn’t cheap.
If we’re not going to actually use the military equipment in Ukraine, what is the point of airlifting it?
We could be fracking a frack of a lot more (e.g., open up federal lands), and building Keystone.
No, of course you didn’t want an invasion. You wanted a vote. And sure enough, there is a referendum set to proceed at the end of this month:
http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-crimea-referendum-date-20140301,0,2305350.story#axzz2upRawfYX I strongly suspect that the vote doesn’t need to be rigged — the majority will freely vote to go with Russia.
If you think that such a vote is legitimate ( or would have been, in the absence of Russian troops), then , sure, the Russian troops showed up early, but they were going to show up after the vote anyway.
If you think a secession vote is only legitimate if the central government agrees to it, then I’m curious about your views on that topic regarding the US Civil War.
Does anyone here, have a single relative in harms way in service of this country?
Yes. There’s several people who have even served or are still serving. But since I suppose you asked that question because you don’t, I guess you will kindly leave the debate now?
dn_guy probably has someone he’s related to who is serving or least will say that he does. I don’t think he would ask this loaded question otherwise.
Why assume that it has to be do nothing or all out war?
What doesn’t help is Obama running his mouth and then doing nothing. It is unproductive to any other effort we could make. Also, words do have power and the ones Obama chooses say a lot. He ought to apply the same care he makes for his domestic political speeches when deciding what to say on issues like Ukraine. But other people wrote those speeches and Obama is too nationalistic to understand geopolitics.
If you ask Putin how many Russian soldiers he’s willing to sacrifice to get control of Crimea the answer would probably be “all that’s required”.
The Crimean Tartars have already said that they will no go back to being in Russia. They are currently 15% of the population there. They have said they would go to the hills. I suggest you go read up about the 1853-1856 Crimean War
What can Ukraine do? Cut Off the pipelines! 66% of Russian gas exported to the EU transits Ukraine (37% of Germany’s gas) pic.twitter.com/8Sxvp82Jjp
No gas = No Bucks for Putin
This isn’t 1914, this is 2014. Lots of levers to pull. Kick them out of the G8. Shut down their banks ability to access global markets. Freeze all Russian-held overseas investments. Revoke visas for all of the Russian billionaires and deport them. Make them hurt economically, make them feel the pain.
If the Ukrainians broke the pipelines it would give Russia an even greater casus belli to do a full scale invasion of Ukraine instead of this covert invasion they’ve been doing so far.
Pipelines can be shut down with maintenance valves, or by shutting down pumps along the route. You don’t need to break them to shut them down.
I’d call what they are doing a full scale invasion already.
“……………. then our options are limited.”
Seeing as how you continue to fail to see the myriad of options we had during the Benghazi Disaster, your assessment is worthless.
And of course there are several very tough options available – none of which involve troops – but Obama and the Yerpeans would have to get tough and work together. As they are committed to winsome surrender that’s not likely to happen.
Shipments of all sorts of military and medical supplies to the Ukrainians could be a good first step.
Another would be instant invitation to NATO and/or the EU.
Yet another would be “goodwill” visits by American Warships and aircraft. Right now.
Yet another would be billions instantly given to our side.
Yet another would be Obama making a trip to the Ukraine and being seen/photographed with the Anti-Russians.
None of these requires boots on the ground or war.
Those are just off the top of my head.
“Another would be instant invitation to NATO and/or the EU.”
You might want to ask the American people first, before you invite them to front row seats in WWIII.
Because it’s a pretty good bet that 99% of them would say ‘screw the Ukraine, why are we meddling in the Middle East again, anyway?’ if they were given a vote on the matter.
Edward,
The EU is a purely Yerpeen construct. So the US has nothing to say about it nor are we dragged into anything because of it.
What you say is true regarding NATO – the US is directly involved. But that just might deter Putin – certainly the Obama creampuff moves/words won’t stop him.
On the other hand, the American People are getting what 50+% voted for and they should get ir good and hard. We wouldn’t be in this situation if we had a foreign policy with some spine to it.
So you’re making the klassik mistake:
Wars are not prevented because someone is too weak.
“Wars are not prevented because someone is too weak.”
Most of South America has armies mostly equipped to flog peasants and
engage in coup’s, they have very few border wars.
We wouldn’t be in this situation if we had a foreign policy with some spine to it.
Like when GW Bush’s muscular foreign policy did absolutely nothing about the Russian invasion of Georgia? Have you ever asked yourself what calculation they were making?
“Like when GW Bush’s muscular foreign policy did absolutely nothing about the Russian invasion of Georgia? Have you ever asked yourself what calculation they were making?”
You must be talking about war.
I am not and never have.
What GWB was thinking about was his 28% approval rating and a conflict weary nation. I did not advocate for war back then either. GWB should have done more but he didn’t. We are reaping the rewards for that too.
Nice try though.
You are nuts man. If they got into NATO this will turn into a world war. Russia is not going to leave Crimea up for grabs that easily. Most of their naval fleet is stationed there.
I think part of the reason why this happened was all the indecision by the EU and the US. Russia has made if clear time and again they don’t want NATO in their borders. Their model for how to handle the process was Finland. They were not pleased by the Baltic nations getting into NATO but that they could stomach. They have St. Petersburg and the Baltic is always going to be partly someone elses. Not the Crimean peninsula. That is something they will not allow to happen. If someone asked the US to fork out Hawaii or San Diego to the Chinese would you do it?
To me this is how it should have been done:
– NATO makes it clear they will not allow Ukraine into NATO.
– EU Security Council members and US guarantee Ukraine’s independence against foreign aggression. In fact they can do this already under the UN charter.
– Ukraine gets elections under UN supervision.
– Russia gets assurance they keep their naval base, access to the Black Sea, and gas transit.
– The EU should start the process to get Ukraine into the trade zone.
Finland. Not Georgia.
Nuts? I said *invite* them into NATO.
They would not accept. But it sends a serious signal.
That would still be Nuts.
If the Ukranians accept, then what?
You have a NATO member state deep inside the russian military perimeter.
NATO is a defensive alliance, and ill equipped for long range.
The Ukrainian invasion was * VERY* easy to predict, even the timeframe. So easy that even I did so; Here’s what I posted in the last Ukraine thread, (it’s about halfway down the comments)
http://www.transterrestrial.com/?p=53751#comments
“Arizona CJ February 23, 2014 at 12:15 am
I find the silence from Moscow today rather ominous, and the fact there seems to be no notice being taken of it incomprehensible. A successful rebellion in Ukraine is a massive setback for Putin’s goals, and I suspect he’s going to try something, probably within the next 48 to 72 hours. He now has a pretext; cross the border to “prevent bloodshed”. He could even use his phone call with our nitwit in chief as a claimed agreement in principle (outsmarting Obama is about as hard as outsmarting a boiled egg).”
I said 48 to 72 hours. So, how did I do? Direct hit on the timeframe; that 24 hour window mentioned in my comment is when the Russian intervention (their plainclothes spec opps guys seizing the parliament building) kicked off. (I freely admit I didn’t see the method in advance, just that they’d go into Ukraine in some manner)
Is Putin using the “Prevent bloodshed, restore order” excuse? Yep.
Am I claiming to be good at predicting such things? Hell no, no more than if I’d predicted that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow. It was glaringly obvious. A child could have done it.
How did I get the timeframe right? Easy, it was glaringly obvious too; I knew the Russians wouldn’t do much until a bit after the Sochi Olympics ended, but would as soon as they could after.
So yes, the Russian move was very, very easy to predict, and thus even I was able to do so.
However, the media didn’t. And neither did the nitwits in the administration who so love to claim “Smart Diplomacy”, yet can’t even see the bloody obvious coming.
Exit question: when will the witless fools in the white house shut up about preserving Ukrainian borders? Haven’t they noticed that the Russians seem to agree on that issue? The Russians might settle for just eastern Ukraine, but what they’d prefer is all of it – and yammering about preserving Ukraine’s current borders is thus rather helpful to Moscow. (IE, install a puppet regime in Kiev, so Ukrine keeps it’s borders and the Putin gets all of Ukraine).
BTW, Obama his promised that Russia will face “consequences”. So far, the only specific one is in the form of threats by the white house to cancel Obama’s summer visit to Russia (if he does, that’s yet another benefit for the Russian from this invasion). So what’s left? Economics. For example, the money we currently pay Russia to give us access to ISS (the station we paid for 90% of.) Or, the Russians might cut us off themselves just to humiliate the US (much as they, and much of the world, are currently laughing at us regarding our treaty obligation to Ukraine).
Don’t know what to do about the Ukraine. But I want to state loud and clear: Russia is not the Soviet Union. This is not part of a criminal conspiracy to take over the world. Russia is not going to invade France. Russia is not going to have a race building thermonuclear missiles in case the United States ever blinks.
We have various options in dealing with Putin, but we should start with the right perspective.
We (that means me) made this mistake after 9/11. We felt shocked and threatened, and we forgot that Islam is not Nazi Germany, and not the Soviet Union. They do not pose an existential threat (even if they want to), and we should not react as if they do. The Iraq War (and the recent Afghanistan War) are the result of forgetting that.
+1
Don’t know what to do about the Ukraine.
First of all it’s NOT “the Ukraine”, it is “Ukraine”. In English you do not us an article in front of the name of the country. SOURCE: “Ukraine – Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary”
But I want to state loud and clear: Russia is not the Soviet Union. This is not part of a criminal conspiracy to take over the world. Russia is not going to invade France. Russia is not going to have a race building thermonuclear missiles in case the United States ever blinks.
So if you think it’s just a “USSR” or “Cold War” thing you are sadly wrong and rather ignorant of history.
No, Russia isn’t going invade France, they have never actually made it that far, the only thing close is during the Napoleonic Wars. But they have invaded Ukraine under the pretext that “Russians”, with the deliberate use of air-quotes, were killed in Crimea. So where were these “deaths”?
Yurov of Russian Human Rights Council: decision to deploy troops to #Crimea in #Ukraine made on false evidence of deaths of Russians 3:07 PM – 1 Mar 2014
CG of #Russia in #Crimea V.#Svetlichny not confirm information about the victims which become the basis for bring troops to Ukraine decision 7:22 PM – 1 Mar 2014
#Russian Consul General in #Crimea disproved Statement of the Federation Council about Victims 8:48 PM – 1 Mar 2014
Meanwhile the Russian media is finally showing the footage of the mid-February Maidan clashes in Kyiv, except the are claiming it is from the present day in Crimea.
Lies. Russian State TV is using footage from clashes in Kiev claiming it’s Crimea. From 1:40 http://www.vesti.ru/only_video.html?vid=580694 3:09 AM – 2 Mar 2014
So if Russia is wiling to invade Ukraine over claimed deaths of “Russians”, why wouldn’t they invade Latvia or Lithuania over Wag-the-Dog claims about ethnic “Russians” there? Maybe that’s the reason for Latvia & Lithuania asked for only the fourth ever NATO Article 4 invocation, triggers immediate North Atlantic Council meeting.
So, here’s a bit of a refresher about the history of the area:
To understand the problem you need to understand that there is a “Right-bank Ukraine” and a “Left-bank Ukraine”.
The Left-bank was the generally Cossack area mostly under the control of the Tsar since the mid 1600′s Khmelnytsky Uprising. It is where the greater percentage of Russian primary language speakers reside. The economy there is more industrial and geared towards the Russian market.
The Right-bank was the area controlled by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth until the mid-to-late 1700′s Partitions of Poland. After Polish-Soviet War of 1919-1920 the western portions of the Right-bank were actually parts of Poland. Yalta “reunited” Right-bank Ukraine after 1945. Since the fall of the Soviet Union the Visegrad Group plus Lithuania, Latvia and Sweden have been working with the Right-bank Ukraine from an economic perspective. Most of Right-bank trade is with the EU and the West, it is more agricultural with less heavy industry. Almost all in Right-bank Ukraine are native Ukrainian speakers.
First of all it’s NOT “the Ukraine”, it is “Ukraine”. In English you do not us an article in front of the name of the country. SOURCE: “Ukraine – Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary”
Only if it’s a proper noun. France, Germany, Canada, Oman
but not if it’s a descriptive noun “The United States”, the “UAE”, the “Benelux” nations,
or The Netherlands, or the CIS or the USSR.
Now I’m not sure if Ukraine is a name or descriptor, but, it’s a bit funny the rules and
there are exceptions, in any grammar rule,
Russia is not the Soviet Union.
You’re right. Russia is just using Ukraine’s unrest to make sure it doesn’t lose Sevastopol, a former Soviet Cold War naval base in the Crimea. We know this, because Kiev, where the civil unrest is manifesting itself, is 600 miles north.
That’s not to say we need to go in with guns blazing. There were plenty of diplomatic maneuvers. But those are pretty much gone now. Obama has decided he doesn’t really care what happens in Ukraine. He could do a 180, like he did in Syria, but the Russians will know he’d back down again. Smart diplomacy doesn’t happen by first turning your back on the issue.
Of course we care what happens in the Ukraine. Just as we care what happens in Iraq. But George Washington already cautioned against foreign entanglements, including between European countries. NATO is already obsolete: Russian aggression is no longer a direct threat to the US. We should act as a member of the United Nations Security Council, as one who loves peace and hated aggression – but not as one of the Allies.
Who is we, kemosabe? It’s not Obama. He’s decided it is unimportant, and he certainly has no interest to lead others to a solution. Perhaps Progressives in the US think this is awesome, as we adverted US participation in war. Yeah!! But we already stuck our nose in the situation in 1994 by signing a treaty with Ukraine that Obama is now ignoring.
Man. This has nothing to do with the Soviet Union. The Russian Empire had naval bases there. Its geopolitics. Pure and simple.
Oh, so it is just empire building. Got it. Thanks.
Hey folks, no problems. Godzilla says the Russian invasion of Ukraine is just protecting their empire. Nothing more to see or complain. We can all go home.
“We can all go home”. Godzilla didn’t say that, and neither did I. The US is not the World’s Policeman.
Or, if someone wants us to defend them, they ought to be paying for the military that does it. If South Korea really doesn’t like us, we should leave. If they suddenly realize they really do like us better than North Korea, they should be paying us for defending them. Same is true for the European Union and Russia.
Again, that doesn’t mean we don’t care. It means that we don’t need to be spending an incredible amount of money on a military that is not designed for self-defense any more. It means that every time one country threatens another, the United States doesn’t need to be the one who jumps up and settles it. The rest of the world doesn’t want us to rule them. We don’t want to do it. We are a Republic, not an Empire.
As Jerry Pournelle has frequently pointed out, the US traditionally has a Navy and an Army, and they are very different. The Navy is used to protect our interests around the world, for the little stuff. Keep sea lanes open, defend embassies, shell cities that harbor pirates. The Army is mostly raised by draft, and is used infrequently in emergencies to crush existential threats.
Mike, I’ll disband my strawmam army when you stop sending yours onto the field of battle. The only people talking military options are the Progressives. Myself and others have mentioned the Obama’s complete neglect of diplomatic options. So you can stop bleating on about South Korea and the military. It was never germane to the discussion and no one other than you cares about it.
And I suspect Godzilla and I agree on the Russian involvement in Crimea more than you and me. He’s right, the Russians have long had a military base in the Crimea long before Lenin, so my comment about the Soviet Base was a bit unfair. But regardless of when it started, Russia just annexed/liberated a section of Ukraine for the purposes of securing it as a military base.
We don’t have to be World Police, but in 1994, we agreed with Ukraine and Russia that we would protect them from foreign invasion if Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal. Ukraine held up their end. Russia did not. And apparently Obama plans to ignore the treaty (Holder did say if you don’t agree with a law then you don’t have to uphold it). That you mention Korea suggests to me that you don’t care about Ukraine and obligations we made to them. That’s fine, but stop the foolish pretense, the faux opprobrium, and the strawmen arguments about Korea.
Leland’s assertion that “in 1994, we agreed with Ukraine and Russia that we would protect them from foreign invasion if Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal” is complete baloney.
Rand, please note that the baloney is also repeated in the link that you quote in your original post above.
See for yourself. Here is the text of the agreement:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ukraine._Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
The sole relevant condition was that we go to the UN Security Council, which we promptly did. Obviously, since Russia is on the security council, the agreement to go to the UN Security Council wasn’t worth much if Russia is the antagonist.
Bob is a dumbass.
From Bob’s link:
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
Why reaffirm this?
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
Taking the issue to the UN Security Council is part of living up to treaties and obligations to protect Ukraine.
Does Bob think protection only comes by threatening war? Or is he claiming Russia respecting Ukraine’s border and that any claim otherwise is baloney? Either way, he is a dumbass.
But I want to state loud and clear: Russia is not the Soviet Union.
Do we really know that? Putin was KGB and well-educated in the tricks of creating and maintaining a totalitarian state. Russia might not ever be “communist” again, but I can see the same evil reappearing under a new ideological guise.
I found this yesterday in a comment at Ace of Spades. I think the writer did an excellent job, and I’m doing my part to help it go viral.
“The Charge against the Light Bringer”
Half a world, half a world,
half a world over,
While our President dithers,
Our enemies grow bolder.
‘Forward! Hope and Change!’
‘Confiscate their guns!’ He said:
While our nation grows weak
Our enemies grow bolder.
‘Forward! Hope and Change!’
Who knew that we were play’d?
Not those bumpersticker’d
With that mantra display’d:
“Because shut up,” their reply,
“We don’t need a reason why,”
“Why don’t you f-off and die!”
While our nation grows weak
Our enemies grow bolder.
Reid to the left of him,
Pelosi to the other left of him,
Maddow in front of them,
Hector’d and scold’d;
Peddling the lies they had to sell,
Bald faced and shameless to tell,
While jawboning us to death,
While our nation goes to Hell
Our enemies grow bolder.
Rhetoric empty and bare,
Rhetoric hangs in air,
Red lines that aren’t really there,
Waiting and watching while
All the world wonder’d:
Far from the tear-gas smoke,
Through your ‘red line’ they broke,
Fascist and Russian
Deliver’d the fatal stroke;
A nation now sunder’d.
While our nation dither’d
Our enemies grew bolder.
Reid to the left of him,
Pelosi to the other left of him,
Maddow in front of them,
Hector’d and scold’d;
Peddling the lies they had to sell,
While our ambassador fell,
With those who fought so well,
“What difference does it make?”
From hearts darkened by Hell,
And our nation goes to sleep,
Our enemies grow bolder.
Why does our glory fade?
O the promises made!
All the world wonder’d.
Dishonor’d ‘Hope and Change’,
Dishonor’d to our shame,
Our enemies embolden’d!
Oooo…. That’s a good one. I spoofed the Light Brigade for Obama’s spastic and inept Syria policy, and he certainly hasn’t improved since then. He and the incompetent boobs he appoints are incapable of learning.
And by the way, this is only the very beginning – the first Act – of a series of aggressive moves all over the world.
Obama showed the world what he’s made of – sour cream.
Obama has demonstrated what his cautions/threats/red lines mean – nothing.
Obama has shown the rest of the world that they have a free hand.
And those guys are going to make hay while they can.
And a lot of people are going to suffer politically, economically and physically, and a lot are going to die.
And all because Obama is a feckless, spineless, clueless moron.
Gregg,
Nothing prevents you from flying to Kiev, with a suitcase full of guns
and helping the oppressed people of the Ukraine fight for their freedom.
Nothing prevents you from having a cogent thought but you somehow are able to resist it.
Got anything to actually contribute?
Do you think Obama has any strong options?
If so what are they?
If not should he have said there will be consequences?
Do you think Ukraine should split in two?
Obama can launch a catastrophic military option, or he can work with international partners to squeeze the russians with soft power. Restricted trade credits, reduced cooperation,
the Moscow stock exchange is tanking, so is the ruble.
Russia exports a boat load of Natgas to the EU, if the EU invests heavily in
Geo-Thermal heat for houses and buildings, along with wind and solar energy,
the Russians can find themselves seriously hosed.
If Germany can work to halve Russian Energy imports to the EU, they could
throttle Putin’s ambitions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Germany
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Electricity_Production_in_Germany.svg
the germans are producing about 20% of their electricity via Renewables, they could push a crash program to get to 50% in 2 years.
Seems a lot cheaper then slugging it out with Moscow.
Given the relationship between Ukraine and Russia, and given Putin’s nature, and given the USA’s approach to the Soviet Union/Russia since they acquired nuclear weapons, I think it makes absolutely no difference whatsoever who the President of the US is, or what his or her foreign policy is. Put Ronald Reagan at the height of his abilities in office, or Eisenhower or Truman or Kennedy, or McCain or Romney or any member of the Bush family in office, and the results would be the same for this case.
The difference is that another president would have been doing a lot of things (among other things) for the past half decade to reduce the value of Putin’s oil and gas.
Lowering the cost of fuel would help a pre-invasion Ukraine, but I don’t think it would do Ukraine much good in the face of the Russian military.
I mean, President Pournelle might have lowered the cost of oil and gas with magically ideal SSP, but he still wouldn’t be directing Admiral Heinlein to drop rocks on Moscow.
I suppose Nixon & Kissinger would have tried to figure out how to use the invasion of Crimea to scare Turkey into working for our benefit in Egypt, or something equally complicated.
At the very least, they would have known Putin was going to move the minute the Olympics were over and would have exercised the number of effective options available to them, BEFORE that happened.
Obama couldn’t even be bothered to attend the Security Briefing.
I had at least three of my friends tell me that Putin would move as soon as the Olympics were over. I admit I thought that he would wait on actually invading (I think it was a stupid move – I mean, using uniforms without insignias? C’mon!), but *everyone*, even me, knew invasion was a possibility.
Obama couldn’t exercised “effective options” before the the invasion because a) there are no effective options, and b) doing anything before the invasion could have hastened or worsened the invasion. Note that even now, the Ukranians are doing just about nothing.
As for the security briefing and “couldn’t even be bothered”, I’d like to see the timeline: when did he have his 90 minute conversation with Putin and when was the briefing?
To clarify: the no insignia thing is just silly, but what makes the invasion stupid is that it makes it harder for Russia to encourage Eastern Ukraine to rebel against Kiev, and it makes it much much harder for Putin to bring all of Ukraine back under the Russian umbrella. The Orange Revolution was reversed in only four years, but Putin’s actions will make it much harder to reverse the Euromaidan Revolution.
As for the security briefing and “couldn’t even be bothered”, I’d like to see the timeline: when did he have his 90 minute conversation with Putin and when was the briefing?
The best situation from this argument is that Obama skipped a strategy session with his national security team to immediately jump into an unprepared negotiation with Putin. The more likely situation is that Obama skipped the strategy session and then later that day talked to Putin without the full consultation of his advisors. Either way, good luck getting a schedule for Saturday from the most transparent administration ever.
Reagan Eisenhower and Truman would not have projected weak, brainless, threats which they had no intention of following through on. Recall that Truman dropped the bomb and went into Korea.
5 years of Obama stupidity and vapidity have brought this about.
What threats are you talking about? Not attending the G8 meeting in Sochi? That’s almost sure to be followed through on. Various kinds of economic isolation? That’s sure to be followed through on too. Germany is against sanctions and is against suspending Russia’s membership in the G8, but you’ll see the USA and the UK push for such measures. What else are you talking about?
Furthermore, when you say Obama brought this about, what are you talking about? Could you be specific? I know it is fun to call the President stupid, and so forth, but I don’t think Obama or the USA had anything to do with this.
“Furthermore, when you say Obama brought this about, what are you talking about? ”
Try reading the entire thread. I already listed several as did others. I’m not here to supply you with your own list.
But I’ll give you another hint:
Russia needs foreign currency.
Ike did nothing when the Russians rolled into Budapest. Talked nice, but, was very clear the hungarians were stuck behind the Iron Curtain.
LBJ and then Nixon did nothing about the Prague Spring in 68. Again too far behind the lines.
Bush-41 gave the Chicken Kiev speech in 1991, written by Condi Rice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_Kiev_speech
Headline from this morning’s Gazeta.pl in Warsaw (one of the two largest newspapers in Poland):
Gen. Koziej: “Nie mozemy wykluczyc w dalszej perspektywie zagrozenia inwazja na Polske”
“We can not rule out in the longer term the risk of invasion of Poland”
Brigadier General Stanislaw Koziej, Head of the Polish National Security Bureau (Biuro Bezpieczenstwa Narodowego, BBN).
Gazeta reporting this morning that the Russian stock market indices and individual stocks are in freefall. RTS -10.3% MICEX -9.9%. Individual stocks falling Gazprom -9.5%, Sberbank -9.4%, Lukoil -7.6%
You want to help Ukraine from the Metro NY/NJ area? Stop buying gas at any Lukoil station.
“Gazeta reporting this morning that the Russian stock market indices and individual stocks are in freefall. RTS -10.3% MICEX -9.9%. Individual stocks falling Gazprom -9.5%, Sberbank -9.4%, Lukoil -7.6%”
Guess what….U.S. stocks cratering too.
Obama should be talking with Poland about restarting the missile defense program there.
That program was never sufficiently large to overcome a Russian attack and everyone knew it. But it would stop an Iranian attack. And it would send a clear message to Moscow
And now…Even the Washington Post is seeing the light:
President Obama’s foreign policy is based on fantasy
By Editorial Board, Published: March 2
“FOR FIVE YEARS, President Obama has led a foreign policy based more on how he thinks the world should operate than on reality. ”
Bingo.
The WaPo came late to the party but they eventually showed up.
Link to the Wapo editorial. Obama’s mindless cheerleaders litter the comment thread.
And here is K.T. McFarland’s take.
K.T. pretty much said (in a much better way) what I’ve said over a number of previous posts:
There are several strong moves the US and also Europe could make. And results will take a little time.
But economically crushing Russia is the solution. Put their balls in a vice and turn the screw one revolution a day. A lot of other moves – such as Obama visiting Ukraine and standing with them and/or re-starting Polish anti-missile defenses (you’ll note that McFarland said what I said above – the shield wasn’t to protect against Russia, but Iran. But I claim no special insight – every thinking primate knew that) – are “messages of intent”.
People act as if this is something new and unprecedented. It’ s happened countless times over the last several thousand years and the solutions are tried and true.
And they do not always include war.
On the other hand, Ukraine had become chaos, with mob violence and mass protests, and the Russians in Ukraine no doubt worried that things were going to get out of hand, if not already out of hand.
Demographically, Crimea is unlike the rest of Ukraine in that it is a Russian stronghold language map of Ukraine.
You could also draw a pretty close parallel with Reagan’s invasion of Grenada, undertaken to protect some medical students.
From what I’ve read so far, Ukraine gets it’s natural gas from Russia.
Ok so if Europe wanted to do something they would start fracking like mad and get that gas to Ukraine.
And of course, we have all these sidelined Keystone pipeline guys who could build the infrastructure.
There are a LOT of good alternatives to war which can have an effect. Some sooner than others. A foreign policy with spine doesn’t mean guns and grenades.
Europe also gets natural gas (about a third of their usage) from Russia, via the TRans Siberian pipeline (which runs through Ukraine.)
This, incidentally, is the same pipeline that Reagan tried to stop the Europeans from building, due to the power over them that this would give the Soviets.
Now… we have both Russia and Ukraine with their hands on the valves. (and the pipeline is vulnerable not just to official action, but independent (sanctioned/deniable, or truly unsanctioned) action as well… especially tempting to some since a disruption in the pipeline hurts Russia financially). Heck, one guy with a rifle could cause a shutdown.
As a reminder of happier times, remember what Reagan did to that pipeline. The results were visible in IR from GEO…. really visible.
http://www.zdnet.com/us-software-blew-up-russian-gas-pipeline-3039147917/
“SEVASTOPOL, Ukraine (AP) — Ukraine: Russians issue ultimatum for surrender of 2 Ukrainian warships in Crimea.”
It begins.. First the complaints similar to the 1930’s…fantasies of oppressed Russians, violence etc requires Russian troops enter a foreign country to restore order.
Now the demands for self-emasculation begin.
Eerily familiar…Czeckoslovakia…….