Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Time for Realism and Common Sense on Ukraine [View all]
The escalating crisis in Ukraine has set off reckless missile-rattling in this country. As Harvards Stephen Walt tweeted on March 2: Public discourse on #Ukraine situation hitting new hghts in hyperbole. (New Cold War, WW III, etc.) Rhetorical overkill not helpful. He may have been thinking of neocon Charles Krauthammer, who in his Washington Post column called for the United States to ante up $15 billion for Ukraine and send a naval flotilla to the Black Sea. The same paper headlined that the crisis tests Obamas focus on diplomacy over military force, quoting Andrew Kuchins of the Center for Strategic and International Studies decrying President Obamas taking the stick option off the table.
The Obama administration has responded to the crisis by flexing its own rhetorical muscles. When Russian President Vladimir Putin ignored Obamas warning that there will be costs if Russia sent troops into Crimea, Secretary of State John Kerry denounced the brazen act of aggression, vowing that Russia is going to lose, the Russian people are going to lose and suggesting asset freezes isolation with respect to trade and investment, while promising economic assistance of the major sort for whatever government emerges in Kiev.
The Obama administration has responded to the crisis by flexing its own rhetorical muscles. When Russian President Vladimir Putin ignored Obamas warning that there will be costs if Russia sent troops into Crimea, Secretary of State John Kerry denounced the brazen act of aggression, vowing that Russia is going to lose, the Russian people are going to lose and suggesting asset freezes isolation with respect to trade and investment, while promising economic assistance of the major sort for whatever government emerges in Kiev.
... skip ...
US foreign policy needs a strong dose of realism and common sense. Its absurd to scold Obama for taking the stick option off the table: the unavoidable fact is that the United States has no stick in relation to Ukraine. Americans have no desire and no reason to go to war with Russia over Crimea, and the EU and the United States are not about to supplant Russias economic influence in Ukraine. Washington is not going to provide the aid, the trade or the subsidized energy Ukraine needs, and the EUwhich is still mired in its own deep economic crisisdoesnt have the means to offer Ukraine much beyond painful austerity. Its new government is not elected, not legitimate and not at all settled. The international community should be pushing hard for compromise before this fragile and bitterly divided country breaks apart.
Frustrated cold warriors filling armchairs in Washingtons outdated strategic think tanks will continue to howl at the moon, but US policy should be run by the sober. The president should work with the EU and Russia to preserve Ukraines territorial unity, support free elections and allow Ukraine to be part of both the EU and the Russian customs union, while pledging that NATO will not extend itself into Ukraine. It is time to reduce tensions, not draw red lines, flex rhetorical muscles and fan the flames of folly.
Frustrated cold warriors filling armchairs in Washingtons outdated strategic think tanks will continue to howl at the moon, but US policy should be run by the sober. The president should work with the EU and Russia to preserve Ukraines territorial unity, support free elections and allow Ukraine to be part of both the EU and the Russian customs union, while pledging that NATO will not extend itself into Ukraine. It is time to reduce tensions, not draw red lines, flex rhetorical muscles and fan the flames of folly.
Editoral @ TheNation
I do agree that it is time for more sober approach to this issue rather than the hyper-ventilating that has been going on in the recent past.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
148 replies, 33345 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (47)
ReplyReply to this post
148 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I'm really disappointed by Obama and Kerry's overblown rhetoric. It's been so off the mark.
reformist2
Mar 2014
#2
I disagree. But let's explore that. The invasion of Crimea has strengthened NATO and
stevenleser
Mar 2014
#33
To varying degrees, but they certainly wont be close now, will they? Even Serbia is embarrassed
stevenleser
Mar 2014
#66
It's a big deal to Russia. Serbian and Russian nationalists have historically been very close.
stevenleser
Mar 2014
#88
unlike the US, who consistently shows aggression toward our "non next-door neighbors"
magical thyme
Mar 2014
#131
I am gratefull for their restraint, considering the recent example we have set on the world stage.
T. J. Kong
Mar 2014
#91
Yes, you're essentially a partisan on Russia's side, with the only objection
geek tragedy
Mar 2014
#104
Your mission here is obviously to troll DUers with insinuation and name-calling
cprise
Mar 2014
#135
So, in a nutshell: hypocrites don't give a flying fuck about the blatancy of their hypocrisy. nt
delrem
Mar 2014
#23
I do believe that today's referendum was hugely, 80+%, in favour of a certain outcome.
delrem
Mar 2014
#31
"Why would anyone want to be on the side of justifying an illegal invasion? "
Comrade Grumpy
Mar 2014
#57
Pointing out that Putin is protecting his own interests is merely a fact,not a value judgement.
scarletwoman
Mar 2014
#34
"Putin justifies the invasion as necessary to protect Russian citizens...but this is a fig leaf."
ProSense
Mar 2014
#51
The real reason IS protecting Russia's interests. And Russia most certainly deemed it necessary.
scarletwoman
Mar 2014
#69
"World powers will always find excuses for their actions, why should Russia be any different?"
ProSense
Mar 2014
#73
I was never trying to justify it in the 1st place, only pointing out why Putin would justify it. nt
scarletwoman
Mar 2014
#103
Really? Pointing out that Black Sea access is important to Russia is "pushing his propaganda"?
scarletwoman
Mar 2014
#110
Is "pointing out that Black Sea access is important to Russia" justification for the invasion?
ProSense
Mar 2014
#127
C'mon, Cha. I believe you're a good-hearted person. Why are you pulling this shit?
scarletwoman
Mar 2014
#100
Well, he went ahead and brought up other recent, sucessful independent referendums, which isn't fair
T. J. Kong
Mar 2014
#121
Okay then! Since Crimea WAS, at one time, a part of Russia, then you shouldn't have any objections
scarletwoman
Mar 2014
#50
+1. It's embarrassing to see Obama try and lecture about territorial borders. Uh, Mr. President,
quinnox
Mar 2014
#8
Yes, it's all about President Obama and SOS Kerry.. Nothing about Poor Putin's Aggression?
Cha
Mar 2014
#22
Great editorial! Many good points made - people should go read the whole thing.
scarletwoman
Mar 2014
#4
“Russia – the only country in the world, capable of transforming the U.S. into radioactive ash"
stevenleser
Mar 2014
#32
I don't see this editorial is scolding anyone other than Republican neo-cons
ConservativeDemocrat
Mar 2014
#52
Anyone who saber-rattles is dumb, but the focus should be on Russia and their invasion. Not the
stevenleser
Mar 2014
#65
You know, the OP simply posted an editorial from The Nation and said he agreed with it.
scarletwoman
Mar 2014
#54
The "USA into RadioActive Dust"guy was recently chosen by Putin to lead an official news agency..
Cha
Mar 2014
#58
Well, that person shared an important piece of information. The media person who said this was
stevenleser
Mar 2014
#141
Under the circumstances, that kind of thing is predictable and doesn't concern me.
2banon
Mar 2014
#142
Do you agree that Putin's actions were a "clear violation of international law"?
ProSense
Mar 2014
#82
But..but...Looking Tough and screaming Bogeyman is ever so much easier.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Mar 2014
#98