Don't ignore Putin's warning

No Party Affiliation

Vladimir Putin's harsh criticism of U.S. military and foreign policy on February 10 should have set off alarm bells in the West, but apparently did not.
In a startlingly blunt speech at a Munich security conference, Russia's president accused Washington of seeking world domination, undermining the UN and other international institutions, monopolizing world energy resources, destabilizing the Mideast by its bungled occupation of Iraq, and unleashing a new nuclear arms race by planning to deploy anti-missile systems in Eastern Europe.
Russia has long fumed over NATO's advance to its western borders, and Washington's attempts to replace Moscow's influence in Ukraine, the Caucasus, and Central Asia.
This column has long maintained that while one sympathizes with the desire of Eastern European states to take shelter from old foe Russia by joining NATO, pushing the alliance to Russia's doorstep was dangerously provocative and militarily ill-advised.
"He who defends everything," said Frederick the Great, "defends nothing."
The Baltic states are indefensible; Bulgaria and Romania are military liabilities, as Germany found in World War II. Bulgaria and Romania were included into NATO because the U.S. wanted access to their Black Sea air bases as part of its air bridge to the Mideast and Central Asia.
The U.S. and its allies shrugged off Putin's warnings while the Western media blasted the Russian leader for daring to challenge the Pax Americana.
President Putin certainly merits strong criticism for his faked-up war against independent Chechnya and massive human rights violations there, and his increasingly authoritarian rule -- ironically, charges many also level at President George W. Bush.
But Putin is absolutely right when he warns that the Bush administration is igniting a strategic arms race by modernizing its nuclear arsenal and planning to deploy ballistic missile defence systems (BMD) in Poland and the Czech Republic.
This week, Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov, chief of Russia's Strategic Missile Forces, warned U.S. BMD plans may compel Russia to withdraw from the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, a cornerstone of U.S.-Russian detente, and deploy a new generation of intermediate-range missiles aimed at Europe. An over-reaction, but still ominous.
The Russians rightly scoff at U.S. claims the BMD systems in Poland and the Czech Republic are designed to stop missiles from Iran and other unspecified "rogue" states.
These new strategic systems, says Moscow and some western defense analysts, are part of the Bush/Cheney administration's profoundly destabilizing efforts to erect anti-missile defenses in Alaska and Europe that may nullify the nuclear arsenals of Russia and China.
In short, the White House is heading away from the traditional balance of mutually assured destruction to absolute nuclear supremacy.
Given the faked war against Iraq, and Bush and Cheney's strident talk about "pre-emptive strikes against threatening nations," the Russians are understandably uneasy.
Putin's angry speech is a warning that Russia, which remains a great power with a large, capable missile force, will not let the U.S. attain unchallenged world nuclear, political, or energy domination. China echoes this warning.
Ironically, high world oil prices caused in good part by Bush's disastrous invasion of Iraq boosted Russia's oil-based economy, allowing Moscow to modernize its run-down armed forces.
Putin's speech also suggested Russia will take a more active role in the Mideast. This could be a positive development given the striking inability of the Bush/Cheney Administration to separate itself from the interests of Israel's right wing parties and return to its traditional role of at least semi-honest broker.
Some Europeans also quietly welcomed Putin's declamation.
There is growing irritation in the EU and NATO -- what former U.S. National Security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski cruelly terms "America's vassal states" -- at being brusquely ordered about by Washington and told to send troops to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Many Western Europeans are starting to long for the Cold War days and old bi-polar world order.
No one loves Russia, but many Europeans say a strong Russia -- and China -- are necessary to restrain some of America's more overly assertive or unwise instincts.
I don't like Russia but what Putin said is no that far fetched. How can a the US admin. think that if they improve and deploy nuclear weapons other countries will not do the same. Especially since the US is the only country to have use a nuclear devise not once but twice. No wonder other countries want to be ready, they do not trust the US. People do not forget something like this!
No Party Affiliation
Last year, the U.S. spent almost half of the total money spent on military arms worldwide. Out of the total of about a trillion dollars, the U.S. spent roughly $480 billion, compared to Russia at $60 billion, China at $50 billion, the UK at around $40 billion.
Russia is understandably worried. The U.S. is playing a dangerous game that we all could lose.
I'm beginning to think Juan and Darkbeaver and other US critics have a point.

Although this is not of much comfort, just consider if Russia or China were the
only superpower. I doubt the situation would be any better, if not worse.

But your criticisms are important for Americans to understand better.
We need to get outside of our bubble, even if we disagree with those outside of us.
We all look back and say through rose coloured glasses "Wasn't having a bi-polar world better"

Think closely, for all the war america causes, think how much less there is in the world without two sides to funnel weaponry into a place? There used to be four or five Iraqs going in on one place.
Africa is just finally starting to rebuild from the last cold war.

Europe , North America, China and Russia don't have to spend every day knowing there may not be a tommorow is something screws up even just a little bit.

Its like driving over a cliff and landing miraculously without getting hurt then saying... wasn't it better when we were going over the cliff? It was like we were practically weight less!

It won't turn out as well the second time.

Similar Threads

by Stretch | Sep 5th, 2008
by exbellcustomer | Jul 3rd, 2008
Ignore the end of the world
by Blackleaf | Apr 14th, 2008
On Ignore
by triedit | Jun 15th, 2007