The Nation - Cold War Against Russia—Without Debate

[newthinking]

Cold War Against Russia—Without Debate
The Nation Magazine

The Obama administration’s decision to isolate Russia, in a new version of “containment,” has met with virtually unanimous support from the political and media establishment.
Katrina vanden Heuvel and Stephen F. Cohen


President Barack Obama delivers a speech at Palais des Beaux-Arts
in Brussels, Belgium, March 26, 2014. (Reuters/Kevin Lamarque)

Future historians will note that in April 2014, nearly a quarter-century after the end of the Soviet Union, the White House declared a new Cold War on Russia—and that, in a grave failure of representative democracy, there was scarcely a public word of debate, much less opposition, from the American political or media establishment.

The Obama administration announced its Cold War indirectly, in a front-page New York Times story by Peter Baker on April 20. According to the report, President Obama has resolved, because of the Ukraine crisis, that he can “never have a constructive relationship” with Russian President Vladimir Putin and will instead “ignore the master of the Kremlin” and focus on “isolating…Russia by cutting off its economic and political ties to the outside world…effectively making it a pariah state.” In short, Baker reports, the White House has adopted “an updated version of the Cold War strategy of containment.” He might have added, a very extreme version. The report has been neither denied nor qualified by the White House.

No modern precedent exists for the shameful complicity of the American political-media elite at this fateful turning point. Considerable congressional and mainstream media debate, even protest, were voiced, for example, during the run-up to the US wars in Vietnam and Iraq and, more recently, proposed wars against Iran and Syria. This Cold War—its epicenter on Russia’s borders; undertaken amid inflammatory American, Russian and Ukrainian media misinformation; and unfolding without the stabilizing practices that prevented disasters during the preceding Cold War—may be even more perilous. It will almost certainly result in a new nuclear arms race, a prospect made worse by Obama’s provocative public assertion that “our conventional forces are significantly superior to the Russians’,” and possibly an actual war with Russia triggered by Ukraine’s looming civil war. (NATO and Russian forces are already mobilizing on the country’s western and eastern borders, while the US-backed Kiev government is warning of a “third world war.”)

More at The Nation site:
http://www.thenation.com/article/179579/cold-war-against-russia-without-debate

[newthinking]

1. Does this show up with a big space between the title and pic for others?

I can't seem to get rid of that large break before the pic, but maybe it is just my browser?

[malaise]

2. No space here

Must read

[newthinking]

4. Thanks.

Must be my browser.

[BlindTiresias]

3. I have the bad feeling

It is not going to stay a cold war. Russia is in a much more desperate situation than they were during the USSR and that previous era's policy of containment. To make matters worse the seemingly dominant opinions from politicians in NATO reeks of hubris: The Russians are weak and we are strong; the war would be easy. This is a dangerous turn of events, I think.

[BillZBubb]

9. I haven't seen any responsible leader claiming a war would be easy.

A war against Russia would be a disaster of epic proportions. Most people know that. The right wing fringe will always call for war first, but in this case not many will follow their advice.

Forces in this country, supported from abroad, have been working feverishly to incite a war against Iran. They have made little headway. The same will happen to any faction trying to force a military confrontation with Russia.

[BlindTiresias]

11. Uh?

Obama himself stated we have a superior military with the implication being obtaining a victory would not be difficult. As he states: “our conventional forces are significantly superior to the Russians’"

Also I don't think most people think a war with Russia would be disastrous or even difficult. The dominant opinion in my experience is the Russians are poorly trained, poorly equipped, and have a rusting air force and a joke of a nuclear arsenal. This is likely a misconception originating from the poor state of the Russian Federation in the 90's, but I very much think it still persists. Even here on DU I got into an argument with someone who thought the Russians were still using ICBM systems from the 70's and our ABM shield would easily negate them. The truth is the Strategic Missile Troops have always been well maintained and they have specifically designed new systems to defeat ABM systems.

My fear is that this popular opinion of a weak and obsolete Russian military will be a fatal error.

[BillZBubb]

18. That's pretty weak evidence to support your initial statement.

Obama didn't imply obtaining a victory would not be difficult. He merely hinted if it came to war, we would prevail. What politician would ever say otherwise? Our conventional forces are superior to the Russians by just about every measure. President Obama certainly knows that fighting on Russian turf would negate much of our advantage.

Your opinion that most people think a war with Russia wouldn't be difficult can't be supported by any concrete evidence. Polling shows a vast majority of Americans don't want to fight with Russia over the Ukraine. That, to me, implies they know such a war would be costly and difficult.

[BlindTiresias]

20. Yeah fair enough

I'll try and gather evidence to support my initial assertion. I suspect that individuals I have spoken with may simply be particularly hawkish democrats.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. Napoleon and Hitler thought Russia would be a pushover...

Just sayin'.

[KoKo]

12. So did Hitler....n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

6. Obama had no choice!

Putin has made it clear that in his view the cold war is still on, at least on Russia's side.

At that point, it pretty much is by definition, whatever policy America adopts.

[randome]

7. A democracy does not mean 300 million citizens get to vote on diplomatic actions.

A ridiculous article. Without debate? Who is Obama supposed to debate with? He's the guy in charge.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[JackRiddler]

24. Does this apply to Russia too?

"Who is Putin supposed to debate with? He's the guy in charge."

And it's not a "diplomatic action," it is a declaration of hostility. It is major policy.

Can't at least one of these two countries be a democracy?

[BillZBubb]

8. What's wrong with a cold war against Putin?

Making Russia pay economically for annexing Ukraine's territory is the least we could do. No matter what people say about the ouster of the prior Ukrainian regime, that did not give Russia any right to grab Crimea.

Certainly the people objecting to the President's actions don't want the Russians to have a free hand against their neighbors? Or do they?

If there is a new cold war, it is against Putin and Putinism. As soon as he's gone and his damage undone, we can get back to normal relations. That's for the Russians to decide.

President Obama has handled this mess about as well as possible, with the one exception of threatening tougher sanctions, but then not really being able to deliver without European approval. He should line up support FIRST, then make threats. The way Obama has gone about it has made him look weak.

[former9thward]

21. Russia did not "grab Crimea".

The people of Crimea wanted to rejoin Russia. It was stolen from Russia by a Ukrainian born dictator, Khrushchev.

[betterdemsonly]

10. When liberals concede to centrist candidates

They concede to the right on the economy and foreign policy. The centrists were the original "Scoop Jackson Democrats" and they are very much in control of the party. They just turned against Bush on Iraq for reasons of political opportunism, but they all voted for the IWR, and voted to continue it once it got going.

[Purveyor]

13. kick. Thanks for posting. +1 eom

[reformist2]

14. There's no new cold war - it's all just words & posturing.

[tritsofme]

15. The administration is handling the situation admirably, and not drawing serious criticism...so

CONTROVERSY!!1!

What an absolute load of BS.

[KG]

16. as afghanistan is winding down, time to create new enemies. or dredge up old ones...

[BillZBubb]

19. You see no problem with Russia annexing territory of its neighbor?

The US didn't force Russia to do that. If anyone is creating enemies, it is Putin and his henchmen.

[newthinking]

17. Just to remind people - The Nation is a well established libral/progressive magazine

[OilemFirchen]

23. It is.

And in the 45 or so years I've been reading it, there have been countless internecine wars between reporters with sterling reputations. It was especially marked during the sixties, mostly over identity politics and even, to a smaller degree, over the Vietnam War.

There have also been some hacks contributing nonsense.

But I digress...

[1000words]

22. LOL @ this administration