This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1timspalding
Zbigniew Brzezinski - If Putin seizes Riga and Tallinn
http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4526875/zbigniew-brzezinski-putin-seizes-riga-tall...
What'd ya think?
http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4526875/zbigniew-brzezinski-putin-seizes-riga-tall...
What'd ya think?
2RickHarsch
'...limited so as not provocative...you know, an American company...'
Given the history of US foreign policy, the existence of American companies anywhere is an act of provocation. Otherwise, my question is, are there not already west-of-the-Baltic-States companies in Estonia and Latvia? i don't know much about Latvia these days, but in the maritime sector Estonia is not only a member (I believe) of the IMO, but one of the world leaders in Vessel Traffic Control techniques and technology.
Given the history of US foreign policy, the existence of American companies anywhere is an act of provocation. Otherwise, my question is, are there not already west-of-the-Baltic-States companies in Estonia and Latvia? i don't know much about Latvia these days, but in the maritime sector Estonia is not only a member (I believe) of the IMO, but one of the world leaders in Vessel Traffic Control techniques and technology.
3Michael_Welch
Estonia and Latvia are members of NATO no? "If Putin seizes --" "we" have a war...
4BruceCoulson
IF NATO (and the U.S.) chooses to honor their agreements, yes. But there will be those who worry about the potential for escalation into nuclear exchanges; who will argue for 'caution' and 'measured responses'.
5Michael_Welch
If NATO agreements are not "honored" that is the end of NATO...
6RickHarsch
Zbiggy speaks well, and it's good to see an old feller with his wits still about him, but he has his head back in the cold war.
7Michael_Welch
So it seems does Putin?...
8RickHarsch
I don't think so. This may be a bit sloppy, but I would say he is running a degraded country, corrupt, adrift and angry, and he is doing what he can to stay on top of it, with stout cynicism.
9Michael_Welch
Okay -- so is he invading Ukraine in order to "buck up the troops" so to speak? What is the possible "end" to all this mess?...
10krolik
Unfortunately the page has not completely turned on the cold war. Re Poland, at least, my current experience there testifies to real anxiety about Putin which can't be dismissed at outdated paranoia. Any talk that assumes a Russian sphere of influence (pre-Soviet, Soviet and post-Soviet) is at Poles' expense and, historically, they've been so badly burnt and paid such high prices that their anxiety is understandable.
For them, policy deriving from a concern for Putin's feelings about "provocations" is laugh-out-loudable. That's defending an imperialist discourse. It's roughly equivalent to telling certain Latin Americans, oooh, please, tip-toe, you might offend the Yanquis!
In Poland, it's not that Americans are so cuddly and lovable. Hardly. But in that region they haven't done what the Russians have done. The presence of American companies (and others, like the French Carrefour, Peugeot, Orange, etc.) is an important, ongoing story, which will have to be sorted out by the nation. But it pales compared to the Russian question.
edited for typo
For them, policy deriving from a concern for Putin's feelings about "provocations" is laugh-out-loudable. That's defending an imperialist discourse. It's roughly equivalent to telling certain Latin Americans, oooh, please, tip-toe, you might offend the Yanquis!
In Poland, it's not that Americans are so cuddly and lovable. Hardly. But in that region they haven't done what the Russians have done. The presence of American companies (and others, like the French Carrefour, Peugeot, Orange, etc.) is an important, ongoing story, which will have to be sorted out by the nation. But it pales compared to the Russian question.
edited for typo
11Michael_Welch
Poles try to "get along" with "everyone" but they'd rather have Americans around whose country is "far away" than Russians who well --...
12timspalding
The thing is, as Brzezinksi notes, things that seem impossible one day are done the next. Today we can declare definitively that Russia would be crazy to invade the Baltics. But much the same was said of Russia before. Russia would never invade Georgia. Russia would never invade and annex Crimea. Russia would never invade eastern Ukraine. And then, one by one, he did all of those things.
And what? The world spins on. We aren't at war with Russia. It's been deuce difficult to get some weak sanctions on them. No, once it happens, it's almost impossible to reverse—one side considers it an absolute necessity, the other does not ultimately care that much. We have other, competing concerns. There was even a time we thought acceding to Russian territorial aggrandizement would ensure their cooperation on Iran and Syria. (In fact, Russia uses the threat of helping them as another means to prevent action against them.) So what's next? If Russia took, say, Ida-Viru County in Estonia—72% Russian—would France and Germany really risk war? No, there'd be more mild sanctions. We'd plead for talks. The Russians would claim 100,000 CIA agents stole Russian uniforms. Jesse Jackson would visit. Dennis Rodman would try to. LibraryThing's political sages would renew their scalding critiques of the 1845 annexation of Texas. Change the channel, dear, I want to watch the Food Network.
Anyway, I wouldn't put the Balkans on the top of the list. Would anyone besides the Poles and other unimportants raise a stink if Russia occupied Byelorussia? He would not, I think, do it under its present regime. But if Byelorussian democrats came to power, they're as good as gone. He'd invade. And there are lots of other Russians to "rescue" around the former Soviet Union. Ukraine is only 17% ethnic Russian, but Putin has invaded it. Larger regions of Kazakhstan have Russian majorities. Would the US fight Putin over Kazakhstan? Perish the thought!
No, he can do whatever he wants, really, short of invading New York to reopen the Russia Tea Room. He has a strategic vision and a tolerance for risk. We have neither.
And what? The world spins on. We aren't at war with Russia. It's been deuce difficult to get some weak sanctions on them. No, once it happens, it's almost impossible to reverse—one side considers it an absolute necessity, the other does not ultimately care that much. We have other, competing concerns. There was even a time we thought acceding to Russian territorial aggrandizement would ensure their cooperation on Iran and Syria. (In fact, Russia uses the threat of helping them as another means to prevent action against them.) So what's next? If Russia took, say, Ida-Viru County in Estonia—72% Russian—would France and Germany really risk war? No, there'd be more mild sanctions. We'd plead for talks. The Russians would claim 100,000 CIA agents stole Russian uniforms. Jesse Jackson would visit. Dennis Rodman would try to. LibraryThing's political sages would renew their scalding critiques of the 1845 annexation of Texas. Change the channel, dear, I want to watch the Food Network.
Anyway, I wouldn't put the Balkans on the top of the list. Would anyone besides the Poles and other unimportants raise a stink if Russia occupied Byelorussia? He would not, I think, do it under its present regime. But if Byelorussian democrats came to power, they're as good as gone. He'd invade. And there are lots of other Russians to "rescue" around the former Soviet Union. Ukraine is only 17% ethnic Russian, but Putin has invaded it. Larger regions of Kazakhstan have Russian majorities. Would the US fight Putin over Kazakhstan? Perish the thought!
No, he can do whatever he wants, really, short of invading New York to reopen the Russia Tea Room. He has a strategic vision and a tolerance for risk. We have neither.
13hf22
>12 timspalding:
I don't know if even the EU is that pathetic, that it would decline to defend the sovereign territory of a member nation, such as Estonia. It would finish the EU, which I can't see for example Germany or France allowing. The entire identity of their governing professions is so closely tied to the EU project, I think they would have no choice but to fight.
Belarus or Kazakhstan however, would get no meaningful help.
I don't know if even the EU is that pathetic, that it would decline to defend the sovereign territory of a member nation, such as Estonia. It would finish the EU, which I can't see for example Germany or France allowing. The entire identity of their governing professions is so closely tied to the EU project, I think they would have no choice but to fight.
Belarus or Kazakhstan however, would get no meaningful help.
14timspalding
>13 hf22:
Yes, but Europe doesn't believe in military action, and if they did, they have no real militaries anymore. Swift US action might come, but it couldn't without strong European support. It would be a crisis, but the alarming becomes normal over time. Cool heads would note that Ida-Viru is very far away from the rest of Europe, and that it was overwhelmingly Russian anyway. Russia would swiftly hold a plebiscite, which it would win handily, putting Europe in the untenable position of going to war with a nuclear nation over a sliver of land whose occupants want to be part of Russia. The Baltic states themselves would never mount an invasion of Russia, and NATO strategists would hardly transport hundreds of thousands of troops across the Baltic to the states themselves, especially with Russia threatening to invade the whole if NATO were to move. There would, perhaps, be some talk of taking Kaliningrad from Poland, but Russia would declare that an invasion there would be considered war, and that would be that. Come winter, they'd threaten to shut off gas to Europe. (Gas prices, meanwhile, would go through the roof, with Russia a primary benefactor.) Come Spring Iran would be about to go nuclear, or the French would be worrying about losing contracts, and everyone would want Putin's help. The matter would settle down.
I honestly don't think that's as far-fetched as it might seem.
Yes, but Europe doesn't believe in military action, and if they did, they have no real militaries anymore. Swift US action might come, but it couldn't without strong European support. It would be a crisis, but the alarming becomes normal over time. Cool heads would note that Ida-Viru is very far away from the rest of Europe, and that it was overwhelmingly Russian anyway. Russia would swiftly hold a plebiscite, which it would win handily, putting Europe in the untenable position of going to war with a nuclear nation over a sliver of land whose occupants want to be part of Russia. The Baltic states themselves would never mount an invasion of Russia, and NATO strategists would hardly transport hundreds of thousands of troops across the Baltic to the states themselves, especially with Russia threatening to invade the whole if NATO were to move. There would, perhaps, be some talk of taking Kaliningrad from Poland, but Russia would declare that an invasion there would be considered war, and that would be that. Come winter, they'd threaten to shut off gas to Europe. (Gas prices, meanwhile, would go through the roof, with Russia a primary benefactor.) Come Spring Iran would be about to go nuclear, or the French would be worrying about losing contracts, and everyone would want Putin's help. The matter would settle down.
I honestly don't think that's as far-fetched as it might seem.
15hf22
>14 timspalding:
I honestly don't think that's as far-fetched as it might seem.
The far-fetched part is the lack of internal repercussions for the EU itself. Such a course of action would cause a number of eastern States to withdraw from the EU, and likely to the end of the EU project itself. The economic benefits of the EU are already questionable, and these circumstances would destroy any security or affective benefits on offer.
It is this the EU elite would fight for. They don't care about Estonian land per se, but they do care about the European project which has consumed them for the last few generations. I can't see them walking away from that for the sake of calling a Russian bluff which Russia would withdraw at the first sight of a real military reaction.
Walking away from EU Flag waving protesters to whom they made no promises is one thing. Walking about from the EU project itself, built on quite serious mutual promises, is quite another.
I honestly don't think that's as far-fetched as it might seem.
The far-fetched part is the lack of internal repercussions for the EU itself. Such a course of action would cause a number of eastern States to withdraw from the EU, and likely to the end of the EU project itself. The economic benefits of the EU are already questionable, and these circumstances would destroy any security or affective benefits on offer.
It is this the EU elite would fight for. They don't care about Estonian land per se, but they do care about the European project which has consumed them for the last few generations. I can't see them walking away from that for the sake of calling a Russian bluff which Russia would withdraw at the first sight of a real military reaction.
Walking away from EU Flag waving protesters to whom they made no promises is one thing. Walking about from the EU project itself, built on quite serious mutual promises, is quite another.
16timspalding
>15 hf22:
I think people would look to NATO, not the EU. The EU has no history of separate defense, not to mention no real military of its own. The Baltic States are NATO members, and that implies mutual defense. (It does not imply how that defense will happen, so the US is under no obligation to paratroop into Estonia.) But fait accompli is fait accompli. I think people generally underestimate this effect. In just a few years the US moved to systemic violations of privacy and legal autonomy that were simply "unthinkable" before. The world spins on. It will spin on with Russian troops in an Estonian county.
I think people would look to NATO, not the EU. The EU has no history of separate defense, not to mention no real military of its own. The Baltic States are NATO members, and that implies mutual defense. (It does not imply how that defense will happen, so the US is under no obligation to paratroop into Estonia.) But fait accompli is fait accompli. I think people generally underestimate this effect. In just a few years the US moved to systemic violations of privacy and legal autonomy that were simply "unthinkable" before. The world spins on. It will spin on with Russian troops in an Estonian county.
17hf22
>16 timspalding:
Well, that is an administrative distinction, rather than a question of political will (which is the question here). The Europeans would need to act via NATO, but it would need to be the Europeans who provide (or not) the political will (and troops).
And sure, the world would move on with Russian troops in an Estonian county. But I am not sure the EU as an ongoing political entity with all its current members could. And that matters to the political decision makers in Europe.
Poland, the Baltics etc would have to react. It is an matter of existential survival for them. Even if their only choice was Finlandization, that would require moving out of the EU orbit.
Well, that is an administrative distinction, rather than a question of political will (which is the question here). The Europeans would need to act via NATO, but it would need to be the Europeans who provide (or not) the political will (and troops).
And sure, the world would move on with Russian troops in an Estonian county. But I am not sure the EU as an ongoing political entity with all its current members could. And that matters to the political decision makers in Europe.
Poland, the Baltics etc would have to react. It is an matter of existential survival for them. Even if their only choice was Finlandization, that would require moving out of the EU orbit.
18RickHarsch
Posted Spalding in satiric mode, a thing to behold:
'If Russia took, say, Ida-Viru County in Estonia—72% Russian—would France and Germany really risk war? No, there'd be more mild sanctions. We'd plead for talks. The Russians would claim 100,000 CIA agents stole Russian uniforms. Jesse Jackson would visit. Dennis Rodman would try to. LibraryThing's political sages would renew their scalding critiques of the 1845 annexation of Texas. Change the channel, dear, I want to watch the Food Network.'
Take a look at the thread 'The Crusades, Obama and so forth.' There Spalding rapidly found himself in over his head--he couldn't pull Ida-Viru county out of his...um, head?...it was the Balkans and Vietnam and he, like the US, had no business there...so he dropped the issue at the point where he found himself having to agree that Vietnam was, well, not such a good thing, and particularly when he found himself in the uncomfortable position of having allied himslef with the lying side of the Iraq war, that which strives vigorously to forget that the administration lie to get the war going--no, Spalding forgot that you can no longer say the US went there and found out that there were no weapons of mass destruction in the first place without seeming an utter imbecile...So he stops posting and bops about looking for a place where he can pretend to be an expert again, or, in his own wry words one of 'LibraryThing's political sages', and dishonestly refer to that thread he fled with a cheap 'renew their scalding critiques of the 1845 annexation of Texas', dishonest because his arguments were easily and thoroughly discredited, a post-famine dry bescumbered field of skeletal thought. (The irony: Spalding is the ranter on the couch with the trigger thumb on the remote.)
Specific to the meaning of this post, anything Spalding writes can be turned on its head and used to describe fear of US behavior.
Krolik makes sense, at least, for Poland truly is the place to observe, having been so poorly used during WWII, having little reason to trust any allies (but those few brave Belgians who saved the 79% of Marmites in Bickupin, but we all know THAT story), and now finally a post wall fall economy beginning to succeed...
'If Russia took, say, Ida-Viru County in Estonia—72% Russian—would France and Germany really risk war? No, there'd be more mild sanctions. We'd plead for talks. The Russians would claim 100,000 CIA agents stole Russian uniforms. Jesse Jackson would visit. Dennis Rodman would try to. LibraryThing's political sages would renew their scalding critiques of the 1845 annexation of Texas. Change the channel, dear, I want to watch the Food Network.'
Take a look at the thread 'The Crusades, Obama and so forth.' There Spalding rapidly found himself in over his head--he couldn't pull Ida-Viru county out of his...um, head?...it was the Balkans and Vietnam and he, like the US, had no business there...so he dropped the issue at the point where he found himself having to agree that Vietnam was, well, not such a good thing, and particularly when he found himself in the uncomfortable position of having allied himslef with the lying side of the Iraq war, that which strives vigorously to forget that the administration lie to get the war going--no, Spalding forgot that you can no longer say the US went there and found out that there were no weapons of mass destruction in the first place without seeming an utter imbecile...So he stops posting and bops about looking for a place where he can pretend to be an expert again, or, in his own wry words one of 'LibraryThing's political sages', and dishonestly refer to that thread he fled with a cheap 'renew their scalding critiques of the 1845 annexation of Texas', dishonest because his arguments were easily and thoroughly discredited, a post-famine dry bescumbered field of skeletal thought. (The irony: Spalding is the ranter on the couch with the trigger thumb on the remote.)
Specific to the meaning of this post, anything Spalding writes can be turned on its head and used to describe fear of US behavior.
Krolik makes sense, at least, for Poland truly is the place to observe, having been so poorly used during WWII, having little reason to trust any allies (but those few brave Belgians who saved the 79% of Marmites in Bickupin, but we all know THAT story), and now finally a post wall fall economy beginning to succeed...
19Doug1943
Well, I hope the Poles, Ukrainians, Balts, etc. don't ask for any sort of support of any kind from the USA, because the USA is EVIL, EVIL, EVIL!
I know the Brits are deeply ashamed that they accepted any help from this horrible wicked country, and the French too, I'll bet.
Let us hope the countries currently under the the shadow of the bear have a higher standard of morality.
And if they don't quite see it that way ... why, they can move to Arizona! (STOLEN Mexican land by the way!)
I know the Brits are deeply ashamed that they accepted any help from this horrible wicked country, and the French too, I'll bet.
Let us hope the countries currently under the the shadow of the bear have a higher standard of morality.
And if they don't quite see it that way ... why, they can move to Arizona! (STOLEN Mexican land by the way!)
20RickHarsch
>19 Doug1943: The Poles asked for help when it mattered to them, during the 1944 uprising. They got nothing.
21Michael_Welch
That's because the Russians were our "pals" then!...
22SimonW11
>8 RickHarsch: sounds like cold war Russia to me.
23RickHarsch
>22 SimonW11: During most of the cold war the Soviets were pretty good mirrors of the US, no more corrupt, no more plunderers, far from angry--two nations of fat cats--both, of course, have a deep cynicism at the core.
24SimonW11
>23 RickHarsch: there was a time when America was not angry?
25RickHarsch
>24 SimonW11: lqarl...But still, I think of the neocolonialism of the mid-forties to mid-sixties as a time of extraordinary expansion and easy, if dirty, triumphs. Naturally, bad things happened to the postwar vision, like China Maoing and the Soviets getting the bomb 15 years too early, but the US has a genius for profiting from new situations through new and cynical stratagems.
When you go through Nevada (I was there for five weeks in Dec./Jan.) you feel what at first seems like an earthquake, low Richter, and I finally found out was the constant intense giggling of the drone force near Las Vegas. Imagine, a plane with no windows, no pilot, can go anywhere, kill anyone...
When you go through Nevada (I was there for five weeks in Dec./Jan.) you feel what at first seems like an earthquake, low Richter, and I finally found out was the constant intense giggling of the drone force near Las Vegas. Imagine, a plane with no windows, no pilot, can go anywhere, kill anyone...
26Michael_Welch
DISTORTED "mirrors" perhaps -- I don't know about the "cynicism" however: for either...
27krolik
>14 timspalding:
There would, perhaps, be some talk of taking Kaliningrad from Poland
??
Don't follow this statement at all.
But the "new normal" danger of fait accompli that you describe is uncomfortably plausible.
Which is why, although I'm skeptical of sending arms into the Ukranian mess and giving Putin a pretext to escalate, I think that bolstering the Baltics and Poland, cold war style, does make sense, as the lesser of evils. Don't relish the idea but "what could have been" is hardly the point at present.
There would, perhaps, be some talk of taking Kaliningrad from Poland
??
Don't follow this statement at all.
But the "new normal" danger of fait accompli that you describe is uncomfortably plausible.
Which is why, although I'm skeptical of sending arms into the Ukranian mess and giving Putin a pretext to escalate, I think that bolstering the Baltics and Poland, cold war style, does make sense, as the lesser of evils. Don't relish the idea but "what could have been" is hardly the point at present.
28timspalding
>27 krolik:
I mean taking it entering it from Poland. That's the only piece of Russia touched by a NATO country, apart from the Baltics. Unlike the Baltics, it's just a little dib-dab. The Russians can't really defend it, and it's pleasantly limited in size—the perfect counter-move to an invasion of a similarly-sized Baltic chunk.
Which is why, although I'm skeptical of sending arms into the Ukranian mess and giving Putin a pretext to escalate, I think that bolstering the Baltics and Poland, cold war style, does make sense, as the lesser of evils. Don't relish the idea but "what could have been" is hardly the point at present.
Yeah, I'm generally hawkish compared to most on LT. But sending arms to Ukraine strikes me as enormously dangerous. I think we can make Ukraine far more painful for Putin—there's a lot of distance to go before Russia is cornered like Iran is now. And there's a case to be made for certain defensive aid—radar systems, etc. But sending actual weapons there? Too scary.
The Baltics is different. Putting a company of soldiers in each, as Brzezinski suggests? Absolutely. If Putin wants to take them over, he needs to shoot at and probably kill some Americans. He is not that stupid. Heck, I'd propose a secret mission to Russia to weld American cheerleaders to the treads of Russian tanks—roll and our people die…
I mean taking it entering it from Poland. That's the only piece of Russia touched by a NATO country, apart from the Baltics. Unlike the Baltics, it's just a little dib-dab. The Russians can't really defend it, and it's pleasantly limited in size—the perfect counter-move to an invasion of a similarly-sized Baltic chunk.
Which is why, although I'm skeptical of sending arms into the Ukranian mess and giving Putin a pretext to escalate, I think that bolstering the Baltics and Poland, cold war style, does make sense, as the lesser of evils. Don't relish the idea but "what could have been" is hardly the point at present.
Yeah, I'm generally hawkish compared to most on LT. But sending arms to Ukraine strikes me as enormously dangerous. I think we can make Ukraine far more painful for Putin—there's a lot of distance to go before Russia is cornered like Iran is now. And there's a case to be made for certain defensive aid—radar systems, etc. But sending actual weapons there? Too scary.
The Baltics is different. Putting a company of soldiers in each, as Brzezinski suggests? Absolutely. If Putin wants to take them over, he needs to shoot at and probably kill some Americans. He is not that stupid. Heck, I'd propose a secret mission to Russia to weld American cheerleaders to the treads of Russian tanks—roll and our people die…
