The Eagle And The Bear
For those of you that might be disappointed that you missed the world’s last major arms race, fear not. It would seem that the Bush Doctrine may very well extend to you, and perhaps even your children, the wonderful opportunity to witness another one of significant proportions.
As we’re all aware, the US defense budget is, in a sentence, completely out of control. True, they do have two wars to pay for at present, but when one looks at the fiscal defense budget for 2008, there is little left to do but hold your hands in your head or run screaming around the room.
First, some interesting facts to consider from the folks at The Centre For Arms Control And Non-Proliferation…
The United States spends more than the next 42 highest spending countries in the world.
Now apply that to the rationale behind the current foreign policy doctrine of the United States. It is one which is both preemptive and unilateralist, both tenets having been exercised by the United States since the adoption of the Wolfowitz Doctrine as official foreign policy. The point that is often overlooked when it comes to what is now known as ‘The Bush Doctrine’ is not how those who aren’t in a position to openly condemn it react, but how those that are in a position to use it as justification for promoting their own aggressive national security agendas do.
North Korea, for example, has, over the last few years, played a masterful game with the United States regarding its nuclear program, one which may very well have been little more than an entirely underdeveloped program aimed at testing the boundaries of the Bush administration while, at the same time, offering the North Korean government flexibility with regards to the acquisition of aid. According to the BBC, the North Koreans have just announced that they are shutting down their nuclear reactor at Yongbyon.
It doesn’t take a genius to realize that the North Koreans were never in a position of real strength with regards to the ‘standoff’ that has occurred over the last few years with the US. Further to that, it also doesn’t take a genius to realize that, given current US foreign policy, they were never in any real position to truly escalate their aggressive behaviour beyond a certain point – that point being one at which they gained enough negotiable capital to start cutting deals in exchange for making concessions.
My reason for mentioning all of this? Well, for every action there is, of course, a reaction. One need only look so far as the proposed ballistic missile defense shield in Eastern Europe to see how it has helped not only alienate the Russians, but place them in a position to take measures of their own – the most worrisome of which is the fact that they are suspending the application of an arms control treaty that has been in place since 1990. Unfortunately, unlike those that can be intimidated by the US and their display of military heavy handedness over the last six years, the Russians are not so easily shaken. More from the BBC…
“Mr Putin signed a decree citing “exceptional circumstances” affecting security as the reason for the move.
Russia has been angered by US plans to base parts of a missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic.
The US said it was “disappointed” by Russia’s decision but would “continue to have discussions with them in the coming months” on how to proceed.
The 1990 Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE) limits the number of heavy weapons deployed between the Atlantic Ocean and the Urals mountains.
The Russian suspension will become effective 150 days after other parties to the treaty have been notified, President Putin’s decree says.
The suspension is not a full-scale withdrawal - but it means that Russia will no longer permit inspections or exchange data on its deployments.
Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak said Moscow was not “shutting the door to dialogue”.
“We have submitted to our partners proposals on ways out of the situation. And we continue to wait for a constructive reaction,” Mr Kislyak said.
A Nato spokesman echoed White House sentiments, saying the alliance “regretted” Russia’s decision.
“The allies consider this treaty to be an important cornerstone of European security,” James Appathurai said.
He added that the move was “a disappointing step in the wrong direction”.
Russia’s suspension of its application of the treaty is yet another sign of a worsening relationship between the US and Russia, says the BBC’s diplomatic correspondent, Jonathan Marcus.
An informal meeting earlier in July at the Bush family’s Maine home seems to have done very little to improve ties between the two leaders, he says.
It is also yet one more sign of a more assertive Russian foreign policy, our diplomatic correspondent says.
The CFE agreement of 1990 was one of the most significant arms control agreements of the Cold War years.
It set strict limits on the number of offensive weapons - battle tanks, combat aircraft, heavy artillery - that the members of the Warsaw Pact and Nato could deploy in Europe, stretching from the Atlantic to the Urals.
In the wake of the collapse of communism, the treaty was revised in 1999, in part to address Russian concerns.
But this revised treaty has never been ratified by the Nato countries who want Russia to withdraw all of its forces from two breakaway regions with Russian-speaking majorities - Abkhazia in Georgia and Trans-Dniester in Moldova.”
Russia is not North Korea, nor is it Iran. It need not hide the fact that it possess the second largest nuclear arsenal in the world, which, while smaller than that of the United States, is still significant enough to end life on earth as we know it. Nor is Vladimir Putin at all comparable to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Kim Jong-il. He was a member of the KGB during the Cold War and is, by no means, unfamiliar with how the United States conducts business.
These are factors that do not make the man in any way admirable, but ones that should be of considerable import with regards to the intrigues and initiatives of the Bush administration on Russia’s doorstep. US involvement in the Ukrainian elections was one thing, the ballistic missile defense shield in Eastern Europe is entirely another. As has been stated in the past, and by the Russians themselves, no ‘rogue state’ possess the ability to even target Europe. The Iranians do not possess the technology, and the North Koreans certainly aren’t about to engage in a crash program so that they can wipe Poland off the face of the map and, in the process, be turned into the world’s largest parking lot. Therefore the question must be asked – what is the point of the shield, and at what point do we view the unshakable resolve of the Bush administration to see it put into effect as dangerous with regards to not only US-Russian relations, but that of European-Russian relations. There is little doubt that the Bush administration views Russia as a failing, in not failed, democracy. But Russia is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a country that can be intimidated or directly confronted by the United States. Given US influencing in Eastern Europe, and the expansion of NATO eastward, the present situation is, by no means, one that should be treated lightly or disregarded. Because confronting the Russians, even by attempting to regionally isolate them, may very well lead to something that will make the war in Iraq a footnote by comparison. And that is not to say that they would be stupid enough to openly confront one another, only that the time honoured use of proxies might find its way back into our lives, creating once again a global atmosphere of heightened anxiety, one that, combined with the hysteria daily produced by the war on terror, might very well render much of the planet Ativan addicts.
Want to bookmark or share this entry?
This entry was posted on Saturday, July 14th, 2007 at 12:17 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
July 14th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
It’s absolutely retarded how much they spend on Military. The bush administration is bullshit and I can’t wait for that asshole to be put out of power, too many people have died. The USA is in more debt then ever and yet he has the richest cabinet. I believe Military should exist to keep some control , but they have taken it way too far. A revolution to disarm all nuclear warfare is what I believe in. It’s sickening to comprehend they actually used one of these weapons on millions of people.
Your are a brilliant and inspirational man Matthew Good, your beliefs and music have touched me and I thank you.
Please come to London Ontario.
Trav
July 14th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Very scary, this game of chess. I’ll be renewing my presciption now.
July 14th, 2007 at 1:15 pm
TravisH, I agree with nearly everything you have to say, with the exception of this line…
[quote]It’s sickening to comprehend they actually used one of these weapons on millions of people.[/quote]
I assume you are talking about ‘fat man’ and ‘little boy.’ Its sickens me to think about what would have happened if they didn’t.
July 14th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
And while the U.S. may see Russia as a failed democracy, truly they must look at themselves as a failed democracy as well. George W. Bush walks around basically doing as he pleases, even though the House of Representatives and Senate are no longer under the Republicans’ control. He won’t accept Alberto Gonzales’ resignation, he has the power to veto any bill passed by Congress (which he has done before and asserts he will do in the future), and he should have been impeached long ago. Unfortunately the Democrats are mostly pussies and won’t do anything about it.
July 14th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
It’s very true the outcome could have been worse without the use of the nuclear weapons. It still sickens me regardless though. They are still being effected by this to this day, radiation goes along way.
July 14th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
[quote]Something like that?[/quote]
My connection with the A-bomb is more far more personal.
I was going to point people here:
http://pages.quicksilver.net.nz/l.rwilloughby/WWII/Changi-prison/Changi.htm
and Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Railway
then here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes
A direct relation to me was there from ‘42 until the end of the war, he was said to have weighed
July 14th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
A wise man once told me, as a child, that the one lesson absolutely set in stone from the 20th Century is that ‘You absolutely Do Not fuck with Russia. Ever. Just don’t do it. Everyone loses.’
Not only is Russia the one nation on Earth still capable of standing up to -everyone-, they will. Forever. And Vladimir Putin is not, as we have seen, a man you can scare.
Once again Bushco proves there is no limit to their tool brigade. They truly are completely fuckng clueless.
July 14th, 2007 at 4:07 pm
[quote comment="19497"]Its sickens me to think about what would have happened if they didn’t.[/quote]
Sold, to the highest quitter: hook, line and sinker.
July 14th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
[quote comment="19507"][quote comment="19497"]Its sickens me to think about what would have happened if they didn’t.[/quote]
Sold, to the highest quitter: hook, line and sinker.[/quote]
What is that supposed to me?
July 14th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
[quote]Sold, to the highest quitter: hook, line and sinker.[/quote]
What is that supposed to mean?
July 14th, 2007 at 6:27 pm
Japan very likely would have surrendered before the bomb was dropped on the condition that it be allowed to keep its Emperor. The US never considered that option. The dropping of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, besides being beyond cruel and despicable, was completely unnecessary.
July 14th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
[quote comment="19509"][quote]Sold, to the highest quitter: hook, line and sinker.[/quote]
What is that supposed to mean?[/quote]
It means you bought it.
July 14th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
“Russians”, eh? Don’t you mean Russian politicans, or Russian foreign policy?
Matt, if there’s something I’ve been impressed with on your site, it’s been the fact that most bloggersseem to understand that we’re all people, and that the problem is not with those who live in Iraq, or Iran, or Russia (or any of the former Soviet States), but the racist, empirical or fascist constructs that guide those “in charge”.
Just because they look like us, doesn’t mean the “policies” that guide our relations with Russia aren’t fundamentally bigoted.
“Russia” is discussed here as if everyone who lives there, old couples, young college students, people just liek you and me….endorse the policies of their government.
It seems that you’re all very careful with regards to middle east cultures, embracing their culture and lifestyle, but when it comes to the “Russians”, it’s open season.
If so, it’s an endorsement for genocide such as we ignored in the Balkans. “Fuck’em, they look llike us, so it ain’t racism if we let ‘em die.”
July 15th, 2007 at 7:18 am
Hey Matt,
I have to say i completely agree with what you are saying. I also was curious to see if you had ever heard of presidential candidate ron paul. He is speaking of the same things you are saying, and becoming extremely popular on the internet. I’m posting a video from youtube of the republican debate in which ron paul speaks the truth about our foreign policy. Even though you’ll hear the applause for guiliani (because truthfully many americans are misguided by their government which you know that already) this event is what has made paul a phenomenon of grassroots campaigning.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7d_e9lrcZ8
that’s the video, let me know what you think!!
July 15th, 2007 at 7:42 am
Huh?
It’s quite a jump in reasoning to go from semantics for critical writing leaving out the word “politicians” - and the claim for endorsement of the atrocities visited upon Hrvatski/Serbski/Bosnie by one another….or by their militant arms and not the all the peoples of those “nations” themselves…..
July 15th, 2007 at 10:43 am
[quote comment="19519"]Japan very likely would have surrendered before the bomb was dropped on the condition that it be allowed to keep its Emperor. The US never considered that option. The dropping of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, besides being beyond cruel and despicable, was completely unnecessary.[/quote]
True. Part of the reason for the bombing was that they wanted to demonstrate the power of their new weapon to the Russians. Another reason may have been that they wanted to prevent the imminent Russian declaration of war against Japan, so that the US could dictate the terms of Japan’s surrender and post-war reconstruction, without Russian interference. Finally, once they had the bomb, there was an assumption that it would have to be used which may have blinded them to other possibilities.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:45 am
[quote]As has been stated in the past, and by the Russians themselves, no ‘rogue state’ possess the ability to even target Europe. [/quote]
What do you say to the argument that the shield is pre-emptive, designed to prevent rouge states from even developing such an ability?
July 15th, 2007 at 11:20 am
[quote comment="19562"][quote]As has been stated in the past, and by the Russians themselves, no ‘rogue state’ possess the ability to even target Europe. [/quote]
What do you say to the argument that the shield is pre-emptive, designed to prevent rouge states from even developing such an ability?[/quote]
The first reply I would make is that trusting the Americans to tell the truth on military matters is a stretch. After ‘Nam, Iraq and a dozen other dirty litle wars, any credibility has been lost. On this “shield”, just think back and place it within the Reagan era “star wars” scheme.
Secondly, it’s the geography obviously.
Thirdly, the “bogeymen” are quickly disappearing. North Korea and Iran are now both allowing inspections. This is before either has a functioning nuclear warhead. I will say that Pakistan is more worrisome, but they don’t enter the conversation yet. In any event, it appears India should be the most concerned and it isn’t under this so-called “protective veil” (and it would be a very long and circuitous route from Pakistan to India via Eastern Europe).
July 15th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
Few of you seem content to bash and insult George Bush (which is typical now) and the American Foreign Policy; what would you do? Could you do better? I think you guys brush off and scoff away at the administration, yet dont really have much of an understanding of their motives. Not saying I have all the answers, just merely making a point.
Interesting article Matt…as usual your posts are quite thought provoking and informative…keep it up…
July 16th, 2007 at 7:19 am
I think elected world leaders should be held to the highest standards possible.