Why Are We Baiting Putin?

[Commy]

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/14447.html

WHY ARE WE BAITING PUTIN?
by Pat Buchanan

"(N)o legitimate interest is served when oil and gas become tools of intimidation or blackmail, either by supply management or attempt to monopolize transportation," thundered Vice President Cheney to the international pro-democracy conference in Vilnius, Lithuania.

"(N)o one can justify actions that undermine the territorial integrity of a neighbor, or interfere with democratic movements."

Cheney's remarks were directed straight at the Kremlin and President Vladimir Putin, who is to host the G-8 Conference in July.

Cheering Cheney on is John McCain, front-runner for the GOP nomination, who has urged President Bush to snub Putin by boycotting the G-8 summit. What the GOP is thus offering the nation right now is seven more years of in-your-face bellicosity in foreign policy.

What does McCain think we would accomplish -- other than a new parading of our moral superiority -- by so public an insult to Putin and Russia as a Bush boycott of the St. Petersburg summit? Do we not have enough trouble in this world, do we not have enough people hating us and Bush that we have to get into Putin's face and antagonize the largest nation on earth and a co-equal nuclear power? What is the purpose of this confrontation diplomacy? What does it accomplish?

Eisenhower and Nixon did not behave like this. Nor did Ford or Bush's father. Reagan called the Soviet Union an "evil empire" once. But the Soviet Union we confronted in those years was hostile. Until lately, today's Russia was not. Yet the Bush boys are in their pulpits, admonishing the world's sinners every day.

What is their beef with Putin's policy?

In January, Putin decided to stop piping subsidized gas to Kiev and start charging the market price. Reason: Ukraine's president, elected with the assistance of U.S. foundations and quasi-government agencies, said he was reorienting Kiev's foreign policy away from Russia and toward NATO and the United States.

If you are headed for NATO, Putin was saying to President Viktor Yushchenko, you can forget the subsidized gas.

Now this is political hardball, but it is a game with which America is not altogether unfamiliar. When Castro reoriented his policy toward Moscow, Cuba's sugar allotment was terminated. U.S. diplomats went all over the world persuading nations not to buy from or sell to Cuba. Economic sanctions on Havana endure to today. We supported, over Reagan's veto, sanctions on South Africa. We have used sanctions as a stick and access to the U.S. market as a carrot since we became a nation. What, after all, was "Dollar Diplomacy" all about?

Cheney accuses Moscow of employing pipeline diplomacy -- i.e., using its oil and gas pipelines to benefit some nations and cut out others. But the United States does the same thing, as it seeks to have the oil and gas of Central Asia transmitted to the West in pipelines that do not transit Iran or Russia.

"(N)o one can justify actions that undermine the territorial integrity of a neighbor," declared Cheney in Vilnius. How the vice president could deliver that line with a straight face escapes me.

Does Cheney not recall our "Captive Nations Resolutions," calling for the liberation of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which, though free between the two world wars, had long belonged to the Russian empire? Does he not recall conservative support for the breakup of the Soviet Union? Does he not recall conservative support for the secession of Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia, and more recently Kosovo, from a Serb-dominated Yugoslavia?

What concerns Cheney is Moscow's support for the secession of Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia. Georgia's president was also elected with the aid of pro-democracy NGOs, mostly funded by Uncle Sam. All these color-coded revolutions in East Europe and Central Asia bear the label, Made in the U.S.A.

When Cheney says, "No one can justify actions that ... interfere with democratic movements," he is hauling water for Freedom House, headed by ex-CIA Director James Woolsey, and similar agencies, which Putin wants shut down or kicked out of Russia for interfering in her internal affairs.

We Americans consider the Monroe Doctrine -- no foreign power is to come into our hemisphere -- to be holy writ. Why, then, can we not understand why Russia might react angrily to our interference in her politics or the politics of former Russian republics?

The effect of U.S. expansion of NATO deep into Eastern Europe, U.S. interference in the politics of the former Soviet republics, and U.S. siting of military bases in the Balkans, Eastern Europe and Central Asia has been to unite Russia and China, and undo the diplomacy of several successive U.S. presidents.

How has this made us more secure?

If we don't want these people in our backyard, what are we doing in theirs? If we don't stop behaving like the British Empire, we will end up like the British Empire.

So, your comments...

 

[GenMarshall]

Blame Mr. Cheney. He was the troller towards the Russians.

 

[Uiler]

No problems, Putin is hitting right back and threatening a new arms race as well:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1771998,00.html

Relations between the US and Russia sank to the lowest point in a decade yesterday when Vladimir Putin harshly rebuked Washington for its criticism last week and compared the US to a hungry wolf that "eats and listens to no one".

Mr Putin, stung by an attack from Dick Cheney, the US vice-president, used his annual state of the nation address to denounce US expansionism and military spending. He also questioned Washington's record on democratic rights. Although he refrained from mentioning the US by name, it was clear that the "wolf" in question referred to Washington.

The deterioration in relations is risky for the US at a time when it is trying to persuade Russia to support a United Nations resolution against Iran over Tehran's nuclear programme.

The acrimony will also encourage senior US Republicans such as John McCain to renew calls for Mr Bush to boycott this year's meeting of the Group of Eight, the world's wealthiest countries, which is scheduled to be held in Russia for the first time.

The war of words is a long way from the optimism with which George Bush said, after his first face-to-face meeting with Mr Putin in 2001, that he had looked into the Russian president's soul and liked what he saw.

Mr Cheney, reflecting Washington's growing disenchantment, told a conference in Vilnius, Lithuania, last week that Russia was sending "mixed signals" over democracy, as well as using its energy resources to "intimidate and blackmail" neighbours.

Mr Putin, in his speech, noted that the American military budget was 25 times the size of Russia's and said the US had turned its home into a castle.

"Good for them," the Russian president said, looking up from his notes, directly at his audience, "but this means we must make our own home strong and reliable. Because we see what is happening in the world. We see it."

He added, in what appeared to be a reference to the US-led invasion of Iraq and its approach to Iran: "As they say, 'comrade wolf knows whom to eat. He eats without listening and he is clearly not going to listen to anyone'." He accused the US of hypocrisy over its criticism of Russia's patchy human rights record.

"Where is all this pathos about protecting human rights and democracy when it comes to the need to pursue their own interests?"

In another veiled reference to Washington's approach to Iraq and Iran, he said: "Methods of force rarely give the desired result and often their consequences are even more terrible than the original threat." He added that Russia was "unambiguously" against the spread of nuclear weapons.

In another apparent jibe aimed at the US, he said countries should not use Russia's negotiations over membership of the World Trade Organisation to make unrelated demands.

"The negotiations for letting Russia into the WTO should not become a bargaining chip for questions that have nothing in common with the activities of this organisation," Mr Putin said.

US senators visiting Moscow last month said Congress would consider its application in the light of Russia's behaviour on human rights and Iran.

Mr Putin said Russia had to resist foreign pressure by bolstering its army, which is currently a ragtag group of a million conscripts galvanised by special forces and nuclear weapons. "We must always be ready to counter any attempts to pressure Russia in order to strengthen positions at our expense," he said. "The stronger our military is, the less temptation there will be to exert such pressure on us."

Much of his hour-long address was dedicated to Russia's demographic plight, which some forecasts have suggested could see the population fall from 142 million to 100 million by 2050. "The number of our citizens shrinks by an average of 700,000 people a year," he said, promising to double state payouts for a first child to £30 a month, with £60 for a second one. He said a healthy population, free from the vices of smoking and drinking, was vital for a healthy army to protect the state.

Boris Makarenko, deputy head of the Centre for Political Technologies, said the speech marked the beginning of a new approach in which Russia, bolstered by high oil and gas prices, had stopped discussing democracy and other issues with the west and had said instead: "We are strong, we have wealth and we'll use it in a way we consider necessary."

Mr Makarenko said the bitter exchange between Washington and Moscow during the past week was designed to get their mutual criticisms out of the way prior to Russia chairing the G8 summit in St Petersburg in July.

Looks like Cheney's words have persuaded Putin to turn back onto the straight and narrow God, the US is good at diplomacy.

I remember how people kept on saying that invading Iraq would show the world that the US is not weak and this would bring world peace as people would be scared of the US. Well, the part about showing the US is not weak is true. The response however seems to be, well, the US seems to be invading other countries even if they are not a threat. We should get more arms. It didn't seem to quite work out as expected.

 

[GenMarshall]

I'll let Dicky and Putin take it out in the school yard .

 

[Uiler]

I'll let Dicky and Putin take it out in the school yard .

They're not a bad match. They are both autocratic paranoid bastards who don't care much about freedom. Putin used to spy on his countrymen (he was KGB). Cheney would love to be able to spy on his countrymen. Perfect!

So Putin calls the US a wolf. What will Cheney's response be? Stay tuned for the next exciting episode as a Cheney who trying to not apologise goes begging to Putin to help him with Iran. Now Putin is not sure that he wants Iran to get nasty nukes but he sure the hell ain't going to do anything until Cheney squeaks and says sorry for calling him a nasty man. Will Putin's desire for vengeance ("I'm no doing nothing until 'heney says sworry!" or his instinctive uneasiness about nukes near him win?

 

[Masquerouge]

Cold War II !

 

[eyrei]

Cheney probably decided we needed another war to keep his party in power, and hopes we won't notice that he started the whole thing.

Seriously though, I just don't think anyone in the White House has a clue how to convince anyone to do anything without pissing them off.

 

[Uiler]

I back Putin on this.

Why? He has a much better turn of phrase than Cheney. Cheney basically uses tired old cliches that even I could write in my sleep.

"(N)o legitimate interest is served when oil and gas become tools of intimidation or blackmail, either by supply management or attempt to monopolize transportation," thundered Vice President Cheney to the international pro-democracy conference in Vilnius, Lithuania.

"(N)o one can justify actions that undermine the territorial integrity of a neighbor, or interfere with democratic movements."

Now look at Putin's:

Mr Putin, in his speech, noted that the American military budget was 25 times the size of Russia's and said the US had turned its home into a castle.

"Good for them," the Russian president said, looking up from his notes, directly at his audience, "but this means we must make our own home strong and reliable. Because we see what is happening in the world. We see it."

He added, in what appeared to be a reference to the US-led invasion of Iraq and its approach to Iran: "As they say, 'comrade wolf knows whom to eat. He eats without listening and he is clearly not going to listen to anyone'." He accused the US of hypocrisy over its criticism of Russia's patchy human rights record.

Clearly much more imaginative. Very quotable. It's the little things as well like how he repeats, the "we see" part. Makes a nice suggestive yet not overt threat. I expect to see it in a future book of quotations. It must be all the culture in Russia. The whole "comrade wolf" part is not bad either.

Seriously though, I don't see that much of a problem of Russia using its oil and gas for political influence. It's as much a legitimate tool as anything else. Russia is free to sell its products to anyone who it wishes. When the US was a net exporter of oil it used to use it as a tool as well. What's the US going to do, *force* Russia to sell oil to the countries it likes? Get real, as if that's going to happen. If the US doesn't like this then it should supply oil and gas to the former Soviet Republics on its own tab. If it can't, it's clearly not strong enough to protect them against Russia. And the former Soviet republics will come to realise this and turn back to Russia. As one Bulgarian said to me, "We only support the US because we see it as a firewall against Russia." This is something known as the cost of empire. If you can't afford to hold up your end of the bargain with your vassal states, then that's your problem.

 

[Commy]

They're not a bad match. They are both autocratic paranoid bastards who don't care much about freedom.

Don't know about Cheney, but Putin is not. In Russia you are free to criticize president, parliament or government. Only state TV channels showing only that our government need.

So Putin calls the US a wolf.

No. He didn't speak about US. YOU called US a wolf and, may be, you have some reasons for it

 

[Uiler]

Don't know about Cheney, but Putin is not. In Russia you are free to criticize president, parliament or government. Only state TV channels showing only that our government need.

No. He didn't speak about US. YOU called US a wolf and, may be, you have some reasons for it

Huh?

"As they say, 'comrade wolf knows whom to eat. He eats without listening and he is clearly not going to listen to anyone'."

That's a direct quote from Putin. How is that not calling the US a wolf?

I may despise Bush and Cheney but I'm not going to fool myself that Putin is anything less than an autocratic dictator. Russian democracy exists just like the Roman senate existed in the time of Augustus. It was there, but as for any real power or independence...

 

[Kayak]

This is tension as Putin tries to remake Russia into a superpower on petro-dollars. He knows that he cam not win an outright arms race but he will not tolarate a 2nd world position for his country. His current obstacle is the declining population really. As Bush and Co have declaired intent to out military any/every-one then this sort of this is inevitable.

 

[Commy]

That's a direct quote from Putin. How is that not calling the US a wolf?

There are words "USA is a wolf" there?

 

[Uiler]

There are words "USA is a wolf" there?

It's the obvious implication.

 

[Uiler]

On the topic of Russia, I remember reading a quote that Ukraine is the difference between Russia as an ordinary country and Russia as an empire.

Anyone care to explain this?

 

[Commy]

2 Uiler: who said this?

 

[Comraddict]

Maybe he is implying that US warmongers are wolves. Either way, Cheney didn't need this. I doubt he did it on his own. So it is whole State Department thing.

I don't think therewill be cold war as it was from '46 to '9x - simply there's less charge and hatred on both sides. But world will have more than one military super-power.

 

[Uiler]

2 Uiler: who said this?

That's a direct quote from Putin.

 

[Uiler]

Maybe he is implying that US warmongers are wolves. Either way, Cheney didn't need this. I doubt he did it on his own. So it is whole State Department thing.

I don't think therewill be cold war as it was from '46 to '9x - simply there's less charge and hatred on both sides. But world will have more than one military super-power.

Well this was Putin's response to Cheney, so no, this is definitely not what set Cheney off.

I agree, there will be no cold war. Russia is simply no match for the US anymore. However, what this signifies is that Russia is moving further and further away from "becoming Western" and returning to being well, Russian. We are essentially seeing a multipolar world redeveloping.

Russia, China, and the Islamic World have highly distinctive cultures from the West and have a strong "identity" and feelings of independence. As they are becoming stronger and stronger they are asserting this indpendence and cultural identity and trying to regain their historical spheres of influence.

 

[Yeeek]

Ever had this silly thought before? All the world leaders forced into a wrestling tournament. Would be tight games don't you think, my money would be on Putin for sure.

 

[Uiler]

Ever had this silly thought before? All the world leaders forced into a wrestling tournament. Would be tight games don't you think, my money would be on Putin for sure.

Well, he does have a black-belt in judo