Skip to main content

Time to lose our illusions about Vladimir Putin- and that 'reset'

Several years ago, a study was done to determine the optimal characteristics of an organism living in an environment with lots of other, diverse organisms. I think an aquarium was the model, but I could be wrong.

Turns out that the strategy best suited for survival was: 1) to be bigger and badder than anybody else; 2) to be as gentle, helpful, and cooperative with the other organisms as possible; 3) to be generous and unselfish with available resources; and 4) to strike ruthlessly and decisively when messed with.

Nothing wrong with "nice-nice" up to a point. It's good geopolitics, in fact- up to a point. In personal ethics, it's what we Christians are bound to practice. We don't get to escalate to Number Four in our personal relationships.

But for governments, it's a different matter. In the Kingdom of the Left Hand, where rules and laws and interpersonal quarrels among various fallen human beings (and the nations they run) are dealt with, the turning of the other cheek is generally not an option. Governments exist to protect their citizens and their national interests. That's their God-given job. It's the worst kind of negligence to confuse what is praiseworthy on a personal level with what is even permissible on the international level.

We've had ample opportunity to view the consequences of the Obama administration's "reset" of our relationship with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. The result has been disastrous. Putin's aggression against Ukraine (in fairness, he got away with the same thing in Georgia during the Bush administration) is outrageous enough. But as was the case in Georgia, Putin and his government are using their own imperialism as an excuse to blame the United States!

It seems that anti-American hysteria is at an all-time high now in Russia- higher even than at any point during the bloody career of the Soviet Union. And by the same kind of bizarre rhetorical gymnastics we in the West were puzzled by during the Soviet years, Putin's own crimes are somehow being blamed on us!

Even the assassination of Putin critic Boris Nemtsov- a crime for which the question "who profits?" gives a rather obvious answer- Russians are blaming the United States! In the super-patriotic atmosphere that has enveloped Russia following the aggression against Ukraine, boycotts of American companies, products, and cultural influences are being encouraged, and some 80% of the Russian people hold a negative view of us.

The pattern fits Putin's campaign to create paranoia in Russia toward his critics and to identify himself and his policies with Russia itself. In a state as closed as Russia, the manipulation of public opinion by those in positions of power and influence is even easier than has been in the United States in matters such as abortion and gay "marriage." People's view of the world is inevitably colored by the information they're allowed to have- and in Russia's case, the tortured propaganda which argues that because Putin is the obvious suspect in Nemtsov's death, and it's in the interest of the United States to have the Russian people unhappy with Putin, it must be we Americans who killed Nemtsov somehow seems sane and even reasonable.

You can't deal with totalitarian countries the way you can with free ones. You can't negotiate with a predator- and Putin is a predator. By all means, let's pursue every reasonable diplomatic option we may come across. But the time has come to stop worrying about hurting Putin's feelings, and to recognize that we are already engaged in a renewal of the Cold War.

Predators are only encouraged by weakness. It's time for President Obama to be firm- and for the American people to begin thinking about which of the candidates in next year's presidential election is most likely to be able to stand up to a predator.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Jan Chamberlain's rhetoric is too strong. But the stand she has taken is right.

I do not share the religion of Jan Chamberlain. I don't even pray to the same god. But I can't help but admire the integrity of the woman who quit the Mormon Tabernacle Choir rather than sing at Donald Trump's inauguration.

Ms. Chamberlain, like me, voted for Evan McMullin in November. Like me, she holds no brief for Hillary Clinton or her agenda. But she cannot, as she put it, "throw roses at Hitler."

As I've said before, comparing Trump to Hitler strikes me as harsh. I believe that Trump is a power-hungry narcissist who exhibits disturbing signs of psychopathy, like Hitler. Like Hitler, he has stigmatized  defenseless minorities- Muslims and undocumented aliens, rather than Jews- and made them scapegoats for the nation's troubles. Like Hitler, he has ridden a wave of irrational hatred and emotion to power. Like Hitler's, his agenda foreshadows disaster for the nation he has been chosen to lead.

But he's not going to set up death camps for Musli…

Neither Evan McMullin nor his movement are going away

Evan McMullin has devoted most of his post-college life- even to the point of foregoing marriage and a family- to fighting ISIS and al Qaeda and our nation's deadliest enemies as a clandestine officer for the CIA. He has done so at the risk of his life.

He has seen authoritarianism in action close-up. One of his main jobs overseas was to locate and facilitate the elimination of jihadist warlords. Evan McMullin knows authoritarians.

And when he looks at Donald Trump, what he sees is an authoritarian like the ones he fought overseas. He knows Donald Trump. After leaving the CIA he served as policy director for the Republican majority in the United States House of Representatives. He tells about his first encounter with The Donald in that role in this opinion piece he wrote for today's New York Times.

In fact, when Mitt Romney and Tom Coburn and all the others who were recruited to run as a conservative third-party candidate against Trump and Hillary Clinton backed out,  McMulli…

Huzzah! Once again, 45 does something majorly right!

First. he appointed Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, and now 45 has- at long last- initiated a sensible space policy, with a plan to promote a "rapid and affordable" return to the moon carried out by private enterprise by 2020.  Afterward, it will be onward to Mars and beyond.

This is a great idea for three reasons. First, private enterprise is the future of space exploration, and as far as I know we will be the first spacefaring nation to put most of its eggs in that basket. Second, it's nice to have eggs! Since the Obama administration canceled the Constellation program to develop the Ares booster and the Orion crew vehicle (though it subsequently reinstated the Orion part of the program), the United States has been twiddling its thumbs while China has taken great leaps toward the moon and other countries- including Russia, India, and Japan- have to various degrees intensified their own space programs. It would be both tragic and foolhardy for the nation which first…