A Mind Is a Terrible Thing to Lose

Has Robert D. Kaplan lost his ever-loving mind? In a Wall Street Journal op-ed he proposes escalating the incipient conflict between Russia and the United States by inserting U. S. troops into the countries of the Baltic:

For example, just as Western military intervention in Syria risks a Russian response in Europe, a robust movement of American forces permanently back to Europe may cause Mr. Putin to be more reasonable in Syria. This may offer a way out of the sterile Syria debate, in which all the options—from establishing safe zones to toppling Bashar Assad’s regime—are problematic and offer no end to the war. By seriously pressuring Russia in Eastern and Central Europe, the U.S. can create conditions for a meaningful negotiation whereby Moscow might have an incentive to shape the behavior of its Syrian client in a better direction.

For the last twenty-five years the U. S. has been engaging in aggressive, provocative actions with respect to Russia. Clinton Administration officials used to brag about it. Not the least of these actions was expanding NATO to include the Baltic countries, a move which did not improve U. S. security one whit.

To understand why the Russians might consider that aggressive, imagine that the U. S. were to reconstitute SEATO with the same “an attack against one is an attack against all” provision. It then expands the reformed organization to include South Korea and starts moving military assets, possibly including nuclear weapons, into South Korea. Do you think the Chinese would find that aggressive and provocative? I think it’s obvious that they would.

An analogy has been drawn between Russia’s nervousness about the Baltic countries and the Cuban missile crisis. That’s right. Except that we’re playing the role of the bullying, aggressive Soviet Union.

If we’re truly interested in defusing the tensions with Russia, a good place to start would be to refocus our efforts in Syria away from regime change and maintain focus on the area in which we and the Russians have a mutual interest: eliminating terrorism. We don’t have to like or support Assad but we could just stop talking about regime change until after we and the Russians have destroyed DAESH.

There’s an old Henny Youngman wisecrack that goes like this. A guy says to his doctor, “Doctor, it hurts when I do that.” (making some contorted gesture) The doctor responds, “Stop doing that.” If we want to defuse tensions with Russia, we might stop doing “that”.

13 comments… add one
  • ... Link

    If you’re right and Hillary wins, we will only do more of “that”.

  • ... Link

    What baffles me is this: What do the elites think they will accomplish by this brinkmanship? They won’t get anything from Russia, and there’s nothing to be had from places like Syria except refugees of the worst sort possible. I can only think they’re doing this hoping to scare the home populations into giving away even more to the elites.

  • I don’t think it’s that nefarious or calculated. I think they believe that if they do the same things often enough they’ll get different results.

  • TastyBits Link

    @Icepick

    … What do the elites think they will accomplish by this brinkmanship? …

    Control.

    They are spoiled brats, and they are throwing a temper tantrum. They have been in charge, and they are used to getting thing done their way. It is no different than Brexit or Trump. The world is crumbling around them, and they are stomping their feet and holding their breath.

    The humorous thing is that it is the world that was built according to their standards. Almost every major country’s financial system is collapses, collapsing, or about to collapse. The nuclear free world is about to re-start the nuclear arms race, but with more participants and new and wondrous abilities. The “End of History” is beginning to look more like the Stone Ages. The Roman Republic or even the Empire is looking a lot better.

    Everything that they have designed is turning into shit, and if it were manure, it could be useful. Instead it is stinky, foul, and diseases-ridden (choleraic), but they refuse to admit what anybody with a few brain cells can see (or smell). Instead, these people are the “basket of deplorables”. In order to remove oneself from this basket, one must replace the scales upon one’s eyes (and attach a clothespin to one’s nose).

    What they intend to accomplish is re-establishing their control. The downside is not anything having to do with Russia. It has to do with everybody else. If Russia is allowed to get away with defying the will of the elites, there will be a next and a next and a next.

    A post nuclear war world in which the elites ruled would be preferable to allowing the “basket of deplorables” anywhere near the seats of power. A nuclear war would level many of the trailer parks taking care a large portion of the “basket”, and under martial law, a lot more progress could be made.

    If Trump is elected, it would not surprise me if they could engineer a nuclear war, and just coincidentally, the presidential bunker would be closed for cleaning that day. Trump and Pence nuked on the same day while Speaker Ryan was safe and sound in a bunker somewhere.

  • Guarneri Link

    Cmon lets all get happy, put on a happy face……….

  • ... Link

    Cmon lets all get happy, put on a happy face……….

    Done!

  • TastyBits Link

    @Drew

    Cmon lets all get happy, put on a happy face……….

    I do not know about anybody else, but I have not felt better in a long time. A lot of people are learning that they are in the “basket of deplorables”, and the qualifications are getting more and more expansive.

    You do realize that you are in the “basket”? On the plus side, your fancy car is in there too, but your AGW killing house is not. (The non-deplorables have limits, you know.)

  • WarrenPeese Link

    The difference is that no one in NATO is threatening to take Russian territory, while Russia is not only threatening to take the sovereign soil of nations not named Russia, Putin has actually taken a part of a country that he had no right taking.
    Oh, and let’s not discount Putin’s aggressiveness, the latest being the deployment of ballistic missiles to the Kaliningrad oblast, which is tucked right between Poland and Estonia. In my experience, you don’t prevail against bullies by cowering.
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/10/11/barack-obama-s-wrong-the-new-cold-war-s-only-just-begun.html

  • Andy Link

    Contrast that to .Chaz Freeman.

    Here’s what he says of Clinton and I think it’s right on the money:

     Judging from her record as well as her most prominent advisers and campaign surrogates, Mrs. Clinton proposes to pursue a somewhat more militaristic version of the policies that have brought us where we are in the world. She would issue an even larger blank check to Israel, step up the effort to overthrow the Assad government, treat Russia as a military problem rather than a factor in the European balance to be managed, and try to keep China down in East Asia and internationally. What would she do differently in Afghanistan or Iraq to replace current policies, which are in advanced stages of failure? What would she do differently about North Korea, Iran, or Turkey? We don’t know.

    But there is no evidence that she regards diplomacy as anything other than a supplement to the threat or use of force against foreign nations that do not subscribe to the American agenda. She seems, in effect, to assume that current alliances and relationships are self-sustaining and that international interactions can therefore be dealt with transactionally in accordance with the desires of our military-industrial-congressional complex, without concern for the impact this will have on the underlying relationships that facilitate our policies and leverage our power.

    In this, she perpetuates the hubris and complacent assumption of omnipotence that are the essence of American exceptionalism and the defining characteristic of the Washington bubble. Meanwhile, her flip-flop on TPP [the Trans–Pacific Partnership], quite aside from gutting the non-military element of the “pivot to Asia” she advocated, leaves her without a coherent policy on foreign trade and investment. It is hardly surprising that, while those with vested interests in current policies find her stands in the main reassuring—or assume she will expediently adjust her views if elected—few find them inspiring.

    The thing about Clinton is that she does have a very extensive record on foreign policy which includes a long list of misjudgments that encourages very little confidence in her ability to judge correctly what is and is not feasible, or to ask the key question in foreign policy, which is always, “And then what?”

    That is essential. If you start a war how are you going to end it? What is your war- termination strategy and how do you prevent the goalposts from being moved by your domestic political process? These are attributes of leadership she has not shown. So that’s the first thing. The second is that you are, in a sense, as Obama has unfortunately demonstrated, defined by the company you keep and the staff that you hire. And she is surrounded with neocons in much the way that a rotten banana is surrounded by fruit flies.

  • Andy Link

    He doesn’t have much good to say about Trump either. I like Freeman, he sees the current FP establishment for the bullshit it is and Kaplan is part of that bullshit unfortunately.

  • ... Link

    The USA pushing for the violent overthrow of the pro-Russian government in Ukraine and replacing it with an overtly hostile anti-Russian government doesn’t seem to count as an act of aggression to some people. Others, especially Russians, see it differently.

    It would be helpful if our foreign policy establishment was capable of thinking one move ahead. Two would be even better.

  • Guarneri Link

    If I’m deplorable with that execrable woman, then I’m doing something right, and damned proud of it. Oh, and the house? Even with three my footprint is less than Al “The Fraud” Gore…….

  • Guarneri Link

    But at least Michael loves me…………..heh.

Leave a Comment