There’s a thought-provoking essay at RealClearWorld that originated at Stratfor you might want to take a look at. It’s lengthy and there’s plenty in it with which to agree or disagree.
I agree, for example, that a future president will need to learn to deal with a fracturing Europe rather than one in the process of uniting. I agree that the next president should stay focused on the fundamentals of economic growth. And I agree that the next and future presidents should get used to the idea of regional powers intervening in the Middle East.
I think that the position articulated on NATO is wrong and so is the analysis of Russia. Let’s address Russia first. Some of Russia’s military build-up is an illusion. Its military is growing relative to GDP because its GDP is shrinking. The balance of Russia’s build-up is the country’s response to (in their view) NATO aggression. We should stop assisting the neo-Nazis that are the present Ukrainian government. They’re just as crooked as their predecessors and no good will come of it.
The greatest threat that we face in Europe is the same as the greatest threat of most of the last 150 years: German expansion. This time around the expansion is in the form of expanding its markets and influence to even poorer countries farther east but its expansion nonetheless. Expanding the EU and NATO into Ukraine is mostly Germany’s project, not ours.
NATO may not be obsolete but it’s the next thing to obsolete and a perpetually expanding NATO is hooey. Does a Ukraine or Georgia that is part of NATO really make us more secure? I think it’s the opposite.
At any rate take a look at the piece. It’s more thoughtful than the typical campaign nonsense we’re getting these days.
Here’s my advice for the next president. Whatever you do, don’t take the position that you should consider what your predecessor did and then do the opposite.
The US government’s m-i is out of control. But that’s like saying “The Bird is a Word.”
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/04/us-delivers-3000-tons-of-weapons-and-ammo-to-al-qaeda-co-in-syria.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gc4QTqslN4
Saying the m-i complex is out of control is like saying The Bird is a Word.
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/04/us-delivers-3000-tons-of-weapons-and-ammo-to-al-qaeda-co-in-syria.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gc4QTqslN4
Saying the m-i complex is out of control is like saying The Bird is a Word in the Trashmen song.
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/04/us-delivers-3000-tons-of-weapons-and-ammo-to-al-qaeda-co-in-syria.html
It’s laughable that some think NATO would go to war over Ukraine or Georgia if they were attacked. Their membership in the alliance would be revealed a fiction should either invoke the treaty.
One of the reasons I started and kept reading Joyner was his point that new administrations are limited what they can, and should, do by the actions of the prior admin. While I think that most obvious in domestic policy, it holds for foreign also. So, while our foreign policy since 2000 had been headed towards trying to include every nation west of Russia into NATO, that was clearly a mistake. While in my perfect world Nuland and the neocons would have had no place in this admin, so maybe we would not have urged Ukraine to try to join the East against Russia, I am just happy that we at least have stopped where we have. The neocons want us to further arm Ukraine and supply at least intel support. They want lots more troops in Western Europe. We have mostly avoided this. If the next POTUS can just continue to de-emphasize our interests in the area, that will be good enough for me.
Steve
To me it’s pretty obvious that NATO is a de facto anti-Russian alliance, especially with the addition of eastern european states into the alliance. They joined because of Russia and because they know their history. They also don’t trust NATO which is why they want American forces based in or near their territory.
The stupidity of that was highlighted by George Kennan who was still alive when the Soviet Union collapsed. He said that the Soviet Union was a special case and that NATO shouldn’t become an anti-Russian alliance which, as you point out, is what the unreconstructed Cold Warriors want.
This is not necessarily “advice” for the next POTUS, just a cautionary note of what they will face once the current president leaves office. At least according to this Navy Times piece, the South China Sea will be more destabilized…..
I think the same could be said about the ME, Africa and Europe as well, because of policy debacles and hesitations made under this administration. Such directionless leadership will, IMO, create a “testing” of our next president as to his/her mettle in interacting with world problems.
BTW, could it be possible that the D & R contestants could end up being Sanders vs Cruz????? Geeez…..