This is feeling a lot like 1915 with Putin as the Tsar sabre rattling at Turkey and looking to see what shiny new territory he can add to the Russian bundle. The big thing that's different is there's no stomach in Europe to sabre rattle back. Think back to the fall of the Ottoman empire - the United States tried to act as an honest broker but then bowed out, kind of like what Obama is doing.
"...The target audience for these achievements is the Russian populace, partly to distract people from their deepening economic woes." Really? Doing all that in Syria, Ukraine and Europe just to distract people's attention from short-term vows? Oh boy!
I'd like to know what Washington's end game is in Syria. And Ukraine. And the South China sea. And in Libya. And in Iraq. And in Afghanistan. And in Poland. And in the Baltics.
The list is extremely long.
The list is extremely long.
2
Europe and the Russian empire have power by the end of regional conflicts in our unhappy planet
"Russia's Endgame in Syria":
There is no evidence that President Putin is looking beyond perpetuating the rule of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Bashar Assad's war against his own people has killed hundreds of thousands of Syrians, displaced eleven million, and forced over six million civilians to flee Syria and seek refuge in neighboring Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, and more than a dozen European countries. As a world leader, Putin has two responsibilities today:
First, persuade Bashar Assad to accept political asylum in Russia or Iran; then negotiate with Assad's military generals and army to make common cause with Assad's enemies and help form a care-taker government. Russian forces, combined with American and Syrian forces together can then easily root out ISIS from Syria.
Once that goal is accomplished, America and Russia together can help Syrians to conduct parliamentary elections and help the fledgling government representing all political factions of Syria to get off the ground and sustain itself. A graceful exit by the super powers then will be in order. Bringing the all-too destructive civil war in Syria to an end and making the return of millions of Syrian refugees possible is something President Putin and President Obama can shake hands on as friends closer to each other than ever before. If America and Russia truly want peace in Syria, it is possible before the November 2016 general election in the U. S.
World leaders, let's have peace in Syria.
There is no evidence that President Putin is looking beyond perpetuating the rule of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Bashar Assad's war against his own people has killed hundreds of thousands of Syrians, displaced eleven million, and forced over six million civilians to flee Syria and seek refuge in neighboring Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, and more than a dozen European countries. As a world leader, Putin has two responsibilities today:
First, persuade Bashar Assad to accept political asylum in Russia or Iran; then negotiate with Assad's military generals and army to make common cause with Assad's enemies and help form a care-taker government. Russian forces, combined with American and Syrian forces together can then easily root out ISIS from Syria.
Once that goal is accomplished, America and Russia together can help Syrians to conduct parliamentary elections and help the fledgling government representing all political factions of Syria to get off the ground and sustain itself. A graceful exit by the super powers then will be in order. Bringing the all-too destructive civil war in Syria to an end and making the return of millions of Syrian refugees possible is something President Putin and President Obama can shake hands on as friends closer to each other than ever before. If America and Russia truly want peace in Syria, it is possible before the November 2016 general election in the U. S.
World leaders, let's have peace in Syria.
If oil stays at $30 a barrel over the next two years, the Russian
economy will be in such a bad state, that his foreign policy initiatives will
flounder and Putin will end up grilling fruit, on his Weber.
We all know what a mistake that is.
economy will be in such a bad state, that his foreign policy initiatives will
flounder and Putin will end up grilling fruit, on his Weber.
We all know what a mistake that is.
The United States should be completely allied with Russia in Syria, allied against wildly violent sectarian insurgents who have been destroying Syria. Russia is trying to end Syrian terrorism, we should be allied with Russia.
2
@Nancy
What part of this conflict do you fail to understand? Russia is first and foremost allied with itself, and then with Bashar al-Assad, who continues to attack and bomb his own people with help from the Russian military.
It is Mr. Assad who is at the root of "Syrian terrorism".
What part of this conflict do you fail to understand? Russia is first and foremost allied with itself, and then with Bashar al-Assad, who continues to attack and bomb his own people with help from the Russian military.
It is Mr. Assad who is at the root of "Syrian terrorism".
4
It is you I'm afraid who is in the dark, big time.
Assad my not be a nice guy, nor was his father, but under them, the country was secular and while so-called 'human rights' were in short supply, people had safety and security.
Enter the entirely foreign-sponsored 'Arab Spring' - the Middle-Eastern version of coloured revolutions; a bunch of agitated protesters demonstrate; the state puts down the revolt, but somehow the mob obtains arms and there you go, you got a civil war.
After years of bloody conflict, the legitimate government of Syria asks its ally, Russia for help (they should have done it 5 years ago).
Isn't that the same military assistance Kuwait asked the US for, when Saddam Hussein overran them?
Assad my not be a nice guy, nor was his father, but under them, the country was secular and while so-called 'human rights' were in short supply, people had safety and security.
Enter the entirely foreign-sponsored 'Arab Spring' - the Middle-Eastern version of coloured revolutions; a bunch of agitated protesters demonstrate; the state puts down the revolt, but somehow the mob obtains arms and there you go, you got a civil war.
After years of bloody conflict, the legitimate government of Syria asks its ally, Russia for help (they should have done it 5 years ago).
Isn't that the same military assistance Kuwait asked the US for, when Saddam Hussein overran them?
3
@waldo
Quite possibly it also takes one in the dark to recognize it.
To begin with: Human Rights has NOT been on Bashar al-Assad's agenda since he assumed authority. If such were the case, those in opposition to his particular form of "rule" would not have to fear for their lives, go into hiding, or leave the country all together.
His father, Hafez al-Assad, may have "stabilized" the country, and maybe even the region, but his tactics were also viewed as being brutal.
True. The Russians are there at Syria's request, not only to further prop up the Assad regime, but to protect their naval base at Tartus. However none of this serves as a reason for the continued slaughter of Syrian civilians who are caught in the crossfire.
Quite possibly it also takes one in the dark to recognize it.
To begin with: Human Rights has NOT been on Bashar al-Assad's agenda since he assumed authority. If such were the case, those in opposition to his particular form of "rule" would not have to fear for their lives, go into hiding, or leave the country all together.
His father, Hafez al-Assad, may have "stabilized" the country, and maybe even the region, but his tactics were also viewed as being brutal.
True. The Russians are there at Syria's request, not only to further prop up the Assad regime, but to protect their naval base at Tartus. However none of this serves as a reason for the continued slaughter of Syrian civilians who are caught in the crossfire.
1
Russia's economy is far from collapsing. That it's shrinking is understandable given the oil price. However, unlike the other oil producing countries Russia has still a positive trade balance and its budget deficit is quite manageable.
So the claim that Russia went to Syria to divert attention from the economy sounds like hollow propaganda - specially given that he had a much more concrete reason: since the rebels had gotten TOWs Assad had been losing a lot of territory.
It will be tricky to have a guided transfer of power in Syria and given that context Russia will need to improvise. The US can play here an important role by convincing the opposition and their foreign supporters to give up on total victory and get real on compromise.
As for Ukraine, Russia has been pushing for a long time for a solution where the rebel-held east gets authonomy and is gradually integrated into Ukraine. For the rebels that would come down to losing with their honor intact. In contrast Ukraine - often encouraged by the US - has kept refusing to grant autonomy and has taken a revengeful attitude. It is the Ukrainian side that still hasn't implemented the Minsk agreement.
The claim that Russia is trying to divide the EU is ridiculous. Many European countries feel that the US is using them (and causing them great damage) in its undeclared economic war against Russia. Predictably people are starting to object.
So the claim that Russia went to Syria to divert attention from the economy sounds like hollow propaganda - specially given that he had a much more concrete reason: since the rebels had gotten TOWs Assad had been losing a lot of territory.
It will be tricky to have a guided transfer of power in Syria and given that context Russia will need to improvise. The US can play here an important role by convincing the opposition and their foreign supporters to give up on total victory and get real on compromise.
As for Ukraine, Russia has been pushing for a long time for a solution where the rebel-held east gets authonomy and is gradually integrated into Ukraine. For the rebels that would come down to losing with their honor intact. In contrast Ukraine - often encouraged by the US - has kept refusing to grant autonomy and has taken a revengeful attitude. It is the Ukrainian side that still hasn't implemented the Minsk agreement.
The claim that Russia is trying to divide the EU is ridiculous. Many European countries feel that the US is using them (and causing them great damage) in its undeclared economic war against Russia. Predictably people are starting to object.
9
@WimR
If, as you say: "Many European countries feel that the US is using them....in its undeclared economic war against Russia." Then I would like to know exactly which countries you are referring to. And why so many other countries (e.g. Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, etc.) are pleading with NATO (of which the U.S. is a member) to maintain a strengthened presence on European soil.
Another thing. Even if Russia's economy is "far from collapsing". It is certainly taking a hit. Take a look at the currency exchange rate.
If, as you say: "Many European countries feel that the US is using them....in its undeclared economic war against Russia." Then I would like to know exactly which countries you are referring to. And why so many other countries (e.g. Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, etc.) are pleading with NATO (of which the U.S. is a member) to maintain a strengthened presence on European soil.
Another thing. Even if Russia's economy is "far from collapsing". It is certainly taking a hit. Take a look at the currency exchange rate.
3
Look at the Eastern fringes of NATO and you will see returned ex-pats, former employees of RFE/RL in key positions of government.
That is no accident.
As for the ruble/$ rate: yes, the ruble is wekaer. But so is the Canadian dollar, the Japanese yen. Even the Euro has slacked.
This is why the Russians are making a determined effort to yank the greenback from their international trade.
It's a movement that is growing by leaps and bounds and that should make the US Treasury nervous.
That is no accident.
As for the ruble/$ rate: yes, the ruble is wekaer. But so is the Canadian dollar, the Japanese yen. Even the Euro has slacked.
This is why the Russians are making a determined effort to yank the greenback from their international trade.
It's a movement that is growing by leaps and bounds and that should make the US Treasury nervous.
3
@waldo
First of all. The Russian ruble will never replace the U.S Dollar in the World Financial Market. And while Russia may be successful in "yanking" back the dollar from their international trade, that still won't lessen the effects that the EU and U.S. sanctions are having.
As far as NATO is concerned, the U.S. isn't twisting anybody's arm to get more deeply involved in the "Eastern fringes".
One last thing. If the U.S. Treasury has any reason to be nervous, it has nothing to do with the course of Russia's currency.
First of all. The Russian ruble will never replace the U.S Dollar in the World Financial Market. And while Russia may be successful in "yanking" back the dollar from their international trade, that still won't lessen the effects that the EU and U.S. sanctions are having.
As far as NATO is concerned, the U.S. isn't twisting anybody's arm to get more deeply involved in the "Eastern fringes".
One last thing. If the U.S. Treasury has any reason to be nervous, it has nothing to do with the course of Russia's currency.
1
Putin is the major destabilizing force in the world today. He has again gotten his way with the airstrikes in Syria, allowing him to continue them through February. Anytime he engages in these pseudo negotiations it is to distract from and extend what he is actually doing on the ground, i.e., bombing civilians and destroying infrastructure. Shame on the EU and US for repeatedly falling for his ruse. Keep the sanctions on and intensify them.
1
Major destabilizing force is the US with its hordes of CIA trained jihadists
1
Don't fool yourself. There is more than one "Major destabilizing force" at play in this scenario. Look at the wider picture.
You can't wash away all your sins and troubles by pointing a finger at someone else ALL THE TIME.
Between 1991 and 2014 what did Ukraine achieve? Nothing. Russia fell into a financial abyss in 1998, but recovered, without IMF massive EU help.
The money spigot will close and soon. Yestreday, there were violent demonstrations in Kiev, last week the government almost fell. 70% of Ukrainians are not happy.
Still it's all Putin's fault?
Between 1991 and 2014 what did Ukraine achieve? Nothing. Russia fell into a financial abyss in 1998, but recovered, without IMF massive EU help.
The money spigot will close and soon. Yestreday, there were violent demonstrations in Kiev, last week the government almost fell. 70% of Ukrainians are not happy.
Still it's all Putin's fault?
1
Well at least Russians are fighting al Qaeda while the west has been supporting them. Putin and Assad are no saints but at least they are beating these terror groups Obama and the others are even arming them. As if 9/11 never happened.
5
@VanDamme
What you fail to mention is the fact that the Russians are also fighting enemies of Bashar al-Assad, which includes bombing his own people.
And President Obama is wise not to enter a conflict that could easily escalate into a full-fledged World War.
Another thing. NO ONE in New York City, or the U.S. will ever forget 9/11.
What you fail to mention is the fact that the Russians are also fighting enemies of Bashar al-Assad, which includes bombing his own people.
And President Obama is wise not to enter a conflict that could easily escalate into a full-fledged World War.
Another thing. NO ONE in New York City, or the U.S. will ever forget 9/11.
1
An awful lot of those you call 'his own people' are not Syrians.
2
Re-read the comment. I am ONLY referring to Mr. Assad's people in this case.
Answer to all three: To ward off US influence, encroachment and interventions.
What were those questions?
Next!
What were those questions?
Next!
3
@Coane
Sorry. What were those questions???....
Sorry. What were those questions???....
To answer the question posed by the headline is not very difficult. Putin thinks he is Napoleon. His goal is to restore Mother Russia to it's former glory. Therefore he has to expand Russian territory, Russian military power, and Russian political influence to prior levels. Perhaps I've managed to "over simplify" both the question and the answer, BUT, I am very sure that I;m on the right track!
1
Replace 'Napoleon' with Teddy Roosevelt, 'Mother Russia' with America and it will be a lot easier for you.
Expanding territory? How about Puerto Rico, Guam, Hawaii, the attempted colonisation of the Philippines in the 1930's...
Expanding territory? How about Puerto Rico, Guam, Hawaii, the attempted colonisation of the Philippines in the 1930's...
2
It shouldn't be hard to figure out his end game. It is replacing us as the significant authority in that area. It's working. When Obama turned his back on Egypt, after they threw out Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, we also reneged on our promise to sell them helicopters and cancelled military exercises with them. Putin then asked Egypt's president to come to Russia to not only see helicopters but other weapon systems we would sell them. He also offered to start military exercises with them. When Obama threatened to bomb Syria because of poison gas weapons, Putin said, "Why don't I just ask Assad to stop using them." He did and Assad said, "Sure." In the meantime Putin raised the number of nuclear plants he will sell Iran from one to four as well as a whole bunch of advanced weapon systems including the latest ground to air missiles. In Syria, we bombed ISIS for months and demanded Assad be removed from power. ISIS continued to spreads its power, Assad is still there as is the civil war that has killed tens of thousands and generated the largest refugee crisis since WW II. Putin sends planes , missiles and military into Syria and within a few months the spread of ISIS is stopped and a cease fire process has begun between the government and rebels. So Putin has shown that he will stand by his allies, that the weapon systems he has for sale are pretty good, and he could not care less for what the U.S. thinks. He wants influence, power, and customers. he is succeeding.
4
Ukraine was a European political disaster. No amount of propaganda could hide from the Ukrainians that the Coup changed one gang of thieves for another. Now Putin and advisers new the truth of this while 'Western' leaders misled their citizens with hilarious tales of a new 'freedom'. Since Putin and his pals new that all that had happened was a change in the names of the Oligarchs plundering the Ukrainian state he alone played a long game. If the US wishes to continue its anti Russian strategy I recommend a 'Strategic' engagement with reality.
2
You don't know what you're talking about or you're a Putin troll.
1
sasha,
in case you missed it. per nyt they had a sale of Ukrainian assets in Washington, dc last year.
in case you missed it. per nyt they had a sale of Ukrainian assets in Washington, dc last year.
I question the writers figures.$3 million a day seems quite low.
One aircraft can run north of 30K per hour. Several have crashed at a unit cost of? Plus munitions. 5000 troops at $300 ( a third of us costs) a day would be $1,500,000.00 What military ever tells the boss what it really costs? After you get past the peasants in sandals and AK stage, war is too expensive to fight.
One aircraft can run north of 30K per hour. Several have crashed at a unit cost of? Plus munitions. 5000 troops at $300 ( a third of us costs) a day would be $1,500,000.00 What military ever tells the boss what it really costs? After you get past the peasants in sandals and AK stage, war is too expensive to fight.
I suppose perspective is everything and this piece starts with the assumption that Russia doesn't belong in Middle East politics, has no "interests"in the region and has just "strong armed itself" into a key role.
The counter assumption, though one never really examined is that the US does belong and our manipulations and untold destruction is somehow mere consequence to a role we are entitled to play.
But after 14 years of war, 3 trillion dollars in costs, the dismemberment of one country, (Iraq) the destruction of another (Libya) and the near destruction of a third (Syria) one can't help but ask what interest does all this serve? Add the 2 million deaths, 3 million internal displacements and nearly 1 million refugees and we are looking at one of the worst calamities of modern times. What interest of the American people does this represent? Blood lust? Collective madness? National megalomania?
My point isn't to say that Russia's actions aren't news or shouldn't be scrutinized or criticized, but that our media typically fails to take a similar honest facts, critical perspective on our own actions. Do we even ask why we continue these wars anymore? Or have they gone on so long that we assume that everyone knows, agrees and so its not really news. Tactical shifts here and there are news, but not the fundamental questions.
When we don't really know what we're doing or why, we as a nation have not only lost our way, we, the people have lost our sense of who we are.
The counter assumption, though one never really examined is that the US does belong and our manipulations and untold destruction is somehow mere consequence to a role we are entitled to play.
But after 14 years of war, 3 trillion dollars in costs, the dismemberment of one country, (Iraq) the destruction of another (Libya) and the near destruction of a third (Syria) one can't help but ask what interest does all this serve? Add the 2 million deaths, 3 million internal displacements and nearly 1 million refugees and we are looking at one of the worst calamities of modern times. What interest of the American people does this represent? Blood lust? Collective madness? National megalomania?
My point isn't to say that Russia's actions aren't news or shouldn't be scrutinized or criticized, but that our media typically fails to take a similar honest facts, critical perspective on our own actions. Do we even ask why we continue these wars anymore? Or have they gone on so long that we assume that everyone knows, agrees and so its not really news. Tactical shifts here and there are news, but not the fundamental questions.
When we don't really know what we're doing or why, we as a nation have not only lost our way, we, the people have lost our sense of who we are.
4
Having read a number of the comments, I saw no discussion of why any of this is of any consequence to the United States.
Consequently, I feel like I'm reading what over involved sports fans have to say about the state of their favorite leagues. Or perhaps they're the musings of players who are deeply involved in an Internet role-playing game.
Why should this matter to Americans? At what point could this cost us lives or serious money?
Consequently, I feel like I'm reading what over involved sports fans have to say about the state of their favorite leagues. Or perhaps they're the musings of players who are deeply involved in an Internet role-playing game.
Why should this matter to Americans? At what point could this cost us lives or serious money?
3
A. Davey ..why should it matter to America? 1. USA signed an agreement with Ukraine in 1994 to protect it's sovereignty if they gave up their nukes. Ukraine held up it's end of the bargain. In fact, here's the real irony...they gave them to Russia as the Americans (President Clinton) demanded. 2. Ukraine has been an American ally since WW2. If our country can't honor it's agreements who will ever consider it trust worthy or credible? Are you mature enough to understand that we need allies? Europe has lived in relative safety since WW2 until Putin decided he wanted to be King. With nukes he is a real danger to USA as well as europe including the middle east. You must know that Putin has also been very actively providing arms in the middle east. Additionally, he has forced this entire immigration process out of Syria. That's why we should care!
1
Russia has a sensible strategy and trustworthy allies. The US strategy in the region is a mess. We opposing Islamists in Iraq while supporting some in Syria, we are allied with a state whose values we don't share at all, Saudi Arabia. I don't like Putin but his country hasn't destabilized the middle east in the way the US has. He won't win everything but he done a better job than we have.
4
50%j of Russia's wonderful economy is totally dependent on commodity energy. And the price is no hovering around $30 a barrel from $120? And the great Russian economy contracted by %3.5 last year? And pensions are being slashed, inflation is in double digits. What's Putin's end game here?
About time Russian puts the foot down about the "end game," when will it be America's turn?
Wars are so much easier to get into than to get out.. we'll just have to wait and see.
Wars are so much easier to get into than to get out.. we'll just have to wait and see.
Russia's GDP is shrinking. It is now smaller than Italy at less than 2 Trillion. Putin has not diversified Russia's economy. It is severely vulnerable to global commodity prices particularly in oil. Putin has tried to strong arm Europe with its control over gas supplies this monopoly is now decreasing due to new gas lines and shipments of liquid gas. Meanwhile, Putin wants to play world-politic and grow Russia's miitary costs. Putin needs to put his shirt back on and become more prudent.
2
How much is the US Federal debt again? 18 trillion?
Am I missing something here?
Am I missing something here?
3
Russia is bombing Syria ruthlessly/recklessly killing tens and thousands of Syrian folks on the pretext of wiping off ISIS/Da'esh. US confused/delusional foreign policy in Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and particularly in Ukraine and now in Syria has handed the political clout to Kremlin. It's not Putin who has outmaneuvered Obama rather US policy shift from Saudi Arabia to Iran has left Americans with an untrustworthy allies status . US does not have a credible foreign policy. US military intervention has played havoc in Afghanistan and Iraq, NATO bombing and change of regime has turned Libya into medieval time tribal society. US/'west' let Assad use chemical weapons 18 times in Syria and allowed him to get away with it by signing a pact with Russia knowing the harsh fact that Russia is protecting her naval base in the Middle East. US sided with el Sisi and torpedoed the Arab spring. US has messed up her role in the international politics; it would be hard to come back. Obama administration has lead from behind on all political fronts and it's lackluster performance in international affairs have serious ramifications for times to come!!!
Putin and most of his cabinet are composed of thieves and psychopaths without any endgame. Just steal more money or acquire more natural resources from other people (kind of like America).
I don't understand why the West don't understand Russia.To me it seems Russian intentions are pretty clear. Russia wants security, as all countries, and with the latest Western military adventures Russia could not feel secure, especially if the West is moving close to its border. In Ukraine, Russia saw quite open attempt of the West to broaden its influence close to Russian borders, it is understandable that Russia didn't like it (after all America didn't like when USSR widened its influence close to American borders). And Russia had reasons to worry, because the last pro-Western Ukrainian Government was talking about closing the Russian military base in Crimea. Russia is stirring Ukrainian pot now? Not more than Ukraine, that still didn't adopt the reforms required by Minsk agreement, clearly showing it doesn't want to compromise with its East. That leads to frustrations.
4
@Julia
The last time I looked, the Ukraine has been an independent country since 1991, and no longer part of the former USSR.
Not only that, since it's independence the Ukraine has taken every step to be recognized by, and part of the European community at large.
If anything, that is what Russia construes as a threat to its supremacy. And if not, why the "annex" of Crimea????
The last time I looked, the Ukraine has been an independent country since 1991, and no longer part of the former USSR.
Not only that, since it's independence the Ukraine has taken every step to be recognized by, and part of the European community at large.
If anything, that is what Russia construes as a threat to its supremacy. And if not, why the "annex" of Crimea????
1
'Ukraine' (quotation marks are mine) isn't really a country, if you think of it. There is a state structure of sorts on the territory the the former Ukrainian SSR, which was cobbled together by Stalin at the end of WWII from large swaths of land taken from others.
Lvóv was Poland. Trans-Carpathia used to be Hungary, then between the 2 world wars, newly-minted Czechoslovakia. Then a piece from Romania, etc.
'Ukraine' has no history of independent existence (coexistence, or being part of Poland, or Lithuania doesn't count).
Lvóv was Poland. Trans-Carpathia used to be Hungary, then between the 2 world wars, newly-minted Czechoslovakia. Then a piece from Romania, etc.
'Ukraine' has no history of independent existence (coexistence, or being part of Poland, or Lithuania doesn't count).
2
Who does Russia need security from? Has anyone threatened Russia? why do all the countries around Russia want NATO in their back yard? Because they know Russia and they are terrified that after Ukraine Putin will be coming after them. Eastern Europeans know Russia very well and they don't like her much. They're aggressive and are trying to revert to the middle ages. Ukraine has never stirred Russia's pot all they've ever wanted to do is get the Russian boot off their necks. The Minsk agreement is for Putin to continue controlling Ukraine.
Not a shred of proof that Russia is behind recent exchange of fire in Ukraine. But Neil gives it as a self evident truth. NYT truth.
In Syria, if there is any chance of peace, it is thanks to Russia. What Putin said-- that the alternative would have been another Somalia and another Lybia -- is true. The USA would have used IS to oust Assad and kept the country in chaos.
That Turkey plays a dirty game, fighting one of the three armies that fight IS on the ground is also clear to everyone. What is your argument Neil? Well, the usual tripe: RUSSIA IS ALWAYS WRONG, WE ALWAYS RIGHT. Period.
In Syria, if there is any chance of peace, it is thanks to Russia. What Putin said-- that the alternative would have been another Somalia and another Lybia -- is true. The USA would have used IS to oust Assad and kept the country in chaos.
That Turkey plays a dirty game, fighting one of the three armies that fight IS on the ground is also clear to everyone. What is your argument Neil? Well, the usual tripe: RUSSIA IS ALWAYS WRONG, WE ALWAYS RIGHT. Period.
4
Wow. It's amazing the slant the media puts on this. There is one main reason Russia and the U.S. Are in Syria. Oil pipeline. Assad had signed a pipeline deal with Iran under the auspicious of Russia. Within 6 months the U.S. Was supporting rebellion because they wanted control of the pipeline. And as for Russia and its global presence. Ask yourself ultimately who is the aggressor and who has caused most the problems. The U.S. Has gone from Afghanistan to Iraq to Lybia to Syria and it has left a mess in all those countries destabilising them and causing massive deaths just so they could overthrow regimes who didn't give it access to their oil. The U.S. Has bases all over the world and missiles pointing towards Russia. Russia has only a couple of bases overseas. Who is the aggressor? And finally the U.S. Knows 50% of its weapons are going to fundamentalists as revealed by a leaked CIA document. But there is money to be made by securing oil and selling arms. This is the real reason for the war.
4
Another Putin troll. Haven't you heard USA does not need other country's oil we have our own.
1
Much as I understand the US frustration from the appearance of a very powerful Russia after burring Gorby's & Yeltsin's "Democracy", but the US should understand that its days as the only superpower are over, its games are over & it can no longer dictate its policies to the world. The US had better put up with these new facts on the ground. Russia is here to stay & China is following suit.
3
@Katib
You over simplify the situation to the point of incredulity. This is not about some popularity game where points are accrued. This is a bona-fide conflict with the potential to expand into a World War.
The time of Pax Americana may be past, or passing, but there are far more things to worry about at this juncture.
You over simplify the situation to the point of incredulity. This is not about some popularity game where points are accrued. This is a bona-fide conflict with the potential to expand into a World War.
The time of Pax Americana may be past, or passing, but there are far more things to worry about at this juncture.
There is no uncertainty. Russia's endgame is whatever benefits Putin the most.
3
The only viable strategy for us is to give Putin and his regime enough rope to hang themselves. Saddle him, and it, with as much grief and disaster as both think they can take on. Let hubris do the heavy lifting. Pacify and reconstruct failed, destroyed states like Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan; and destroyed regions, Caucuses, Crimea, Moldova, Ukraine. And any new conflicts Putin wants to embroil Russia in to little purpose at vast expense. "Too much of a bad thing", in other words. A poisonous 1,000 course banquet followed by death by 1,000 cuts. The "Hitler Remedy".
That's because the Russian Federation's reconstituted military can invade, overwhelm, reoccupy and reabsorb most of its "Near Abroad". It enjoys every local and regional advantage. N.A.T.O. can't establish a credible conventional deterrent 250 miles from Moscow, nor should it try. And no American president will unilaterally attack Europe's largest nuclear power with nuclear weapons unless Russia attacks the continental United States first. It won't happen.
That leaves what? Deterrence. But it can only come through an unambiguous message sent by the region's non-Russian peoples: if you covet our land, fine. You can have it,mbut only over our dead bodies; every man, woman and child.
The West must arm them adequately now of course, to make the warning creditable, anticipating a life-&-death struggle; and continue to provide aid after Putin's armies start waging aggressive war, by itself a terrible war crime.
That's because the Russian Federation's reconstituted military can invade, overwhelm, reoccupy and reabsorb most of its "Near Abroad". It enjoys every local and regional advantage. N.A.T.O. can't establish a credible conventional deterrent 250 miles from Moscow, nor should it try. And no American president will unilaterally attack Europe's largest nuclear power with nuclear weapons unless Russia attacks the continental United States first. It won't happen.
That leaves what? Deterrence. But it can only come through an unambiguous message sent by the region's non-Russian peoples: if you covet our land, fine. You can have it,mbut only over our dead bodies; every man, woman and child.
The West must arm them adequately now of course, to make the warning creditable, anticipating a life-&-death struggle; and continue to provide aid after Putin's armies start waging aggressive war, by itself a terrible war crime.
We need to pull out of Europe all together- None of the European countries like us anyway [something I particularly don't lose sleep over]. Let Putin take what he wants and let the chips fall where they may- I've had it with Diplomacy and our vain attempts to spread and share Democracy around the world. If the rest of the world hasn't figured it out by now, then there's really no use ringing a doorbell knowing darn well nobody will answer. We can start by dismantling our lousy State Department and save the taxpayers $70 Billion a year and use that money to fix Flint, Michigan.
1
The U.S. continues to be quite naïve in how it handles both Russia & China with their expansionist policies. This cessation of hostilities is just a ruse for Assad to regain control of Syria. Once that happens, he will attempt to eradicate the Sunni majority with the support of Shia Iran & Hezbollah. Expect very soon for Turkish troops in the North & Saudi led troops in the South to create safe zones within Syria for their Sunni brethren. Syria is a failed state. What the U.S. needs to do is protect its secular Kurdish allies in both Syria & Iraq and ensure Israel is isolated from the wider regional conflict to come. Fasten your seat belts!
116,516 Americans were killed during World War One. 405,399 Americans were killed during World War Two. 1.4 million Americans were wounded in both wars. Since most of these casualties were in Europe the price America paid for liberating Europe which we take for granted today, cannot be undervalued, forgotten, nor disrespected.
Today, Ukraine - the largest country within Europe - is fighting a Russian invasion. Nearly 10,000 Ukrainians have fought and died protecting her country, a country which stands between Europe's cherished freedom and Putin's aggression.
If America does not want to pay the price for protecting Europe's freedom with more blood from her sons and daughters with another European war in the next few years, fine. But America had better step up by supporting Ukraine with lethal military weapons. Putin only understands strength. Nothing else.
Today, Ukraine - the largest country within Europe - is fighting a Russian invasion. Nearly 10,000 Ukrainians have fought and died protecting her country, a country which stands between Europe's cherished freedom and Putin's aggression.
If America does not want to pay the price for protecting Europe's freedom with more blood from her sons and daughters with another European war in the next few years, fine. But America had better step up by supporting Ukraine with lethal military weapons. Putin only understands strength. Nothing else.
4
Let's not forget that Russia lost 27 million while liberating herself and half of Europe. Yes, Putin understands strength - the strength that's derived from unwavering sense of responsibility towards guarding the interest of the Russian people. Its same strength that has kept Russia in one piece after the chaotic 90s.
1
This is a Russian - Shite issue now, as we bowed out of the leadership role.
Military wisdom:
"Soldiers win battles, economies win wars"
Putin is overstretching, like the soviet-union was overstretched. In this fight for supremacy we should foster the exhaustion of our opponent.
We, on the other side, should be cautious not to overstretch ourself.
"Soldiers win battles, economies win wars"
Putin is overstretching, like the soviet-union was overstretched. In this fight for supremacy we should foster the exhaustion of our opponent.
We, on the other side, should be cautious not to overstretch ourself.
Putin is engaged in classic Soviet style foreign policy which proceeds in a series of zig zags. First hard policies then soft. This keeps opponents off balance and gives maximum flexibility in policy choices. It's all very Stalinist. It's hard to believe the State Department doesn't know this since it's been recognized in books on the subject since the 50's.
2
Putin's "trifecta" of foreign policy reflects his play-by-ear skills. Unlike Western world leaders, he can take swift military actions without objections from lawmakers. Ukraine is meeting the fate of countries like Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabakh, that are being engulfed by a frozen conflict, orchestrated by the Kremlin. There is nothing that outsiders can do about it.
Syria is not Ukraine. There are many more players involved in the conflict. Russia may have secured an air base near Latakia, apart from its naval base in Tartus. But there is no long-term guarantee that it can keep them, even if Assad remains in power in the "rump state" that it has carved out for him, because the regional - Sunni - players will continue to fight and topple him. Can Russia afford to remain in Syria indefinitely to protect its interests and the Assad regime? If the "Russian public /is/ weary of the war in neighboring Ukraine," what will they say about a protracted engagement in Syria?
Putin has funded an army of trolls to attack anybody in Western media, who doesn't have a favourable view of his politics, and showered largesse on far left and right populist parties in the West to divide the EU. We are over 500 million in Europe, and many are unhappy with the EU right now. But how many of us will really want to join Putin's Eurasian Economic Union, if we are forced to choose? Putin may manage to divide us, but he won't be able to rule over us.
Syria is not Ukraine. There are many more players involved in the conflict. Russia may have secured an air base near Latakia, apart from its naval base in Tartus. But there is no long-term guarantee that it can keep them, even if Assad remains in power in the "rump state" that it has carved out for him, because the regional - Sunni - players will continue to fight and topple him. Can Russia afford to remain in Syria indefinitely to protect its interests and the Assad regime? If the "Russian public /is/ weary of the war in neighboring Ukraine," what will they say about a protracted engagement in Syria?
Putin has funded an army of trolls to attack anybody in Western media, who doesn't have a favourable view of his politics, and showered largesse on far left and right populist parties in the West to divide the EU. We are over 500 million in Europe, and many are unhappy with the EU right now. But how many of us will really want to join Putin's Eurasian Economic Union, if we are forced to choose? Putin may manage to divide us, but he won't be able to rule over us.
1
I think it's time to pass out the man pads or stinger missles. Let loose the dogs of war. At least we would have cable news talk about something other than the losers running for president. How badly do we want Putin to start losing?
2
And when one of those missiles winds up downing a 747 out of Cairo, what then?
1
To intimate that this foray into mass murder by the criminal Putin regime is any way a 'success' is to totally ignore the fact of unintended consequences. His bombing of the Sunnis and innocents will certainly cause problems for Russia going forward at home and in Syria. In Russia as he tries to show greatness abroad he is forced to emasculate private enterprise by taxation, and discourage any investment by the West. He also continues to cannibalize the Russian economy to finance his pet projects in Ukraine, Syria, Abkhazia, and Europe. Unfortunately, he is milking the very people that could bring greatness and strength to Russia. If this is a sign of a bold and brilliant tactician, then we are all really missing something to this story. He has been an utter disaster for the world and Russia for the 15 years of his tyrannical rule and the trend continues downward.
3
I remember when Russia was conducting its "local" war in and around Ukraine.
President Obama and his team had to lead the way to impose sanctions as strict as "we" wanted to. A whole lot of Europe close to Russia just can't, realistically and therefore politically, say they are the hard guys [gals] for the whole world.
These types of sanctions move slowly, but that time for cause and effect and reaction and decisions and resolution seem to be much more effective than ... yet another war against someone we liked 20 years ago?
President Obama and his team had to lead the way to impose sanctions as strict as "we" wanted to. A whole lot of Europe close to Russia just can't, realistically and therefore politically, say they are the hard guys [gals] for the whole world.
These types of sanctions move slowly, but that time for cause and effect and reaction and decisions and resolution seem to be much more effective than ... yet another war against someone we liked 20 years ago?
1
Russia has no doubts about its endgame, and is getting there pretty quickly. The only doubts are in the minds of Western Russophiles that will invoke the mantra "Russia is not the Soviet Union" to engage in the same kinds of apologetics for Putin's imperialism that they did for Stalin's.
2
The NYTs never tires of getting the Putin story wrong. To the NYTs Russia invaded Ukraine and seized Crimea which is not true. The West backed a disorganized coup in Feb 2014 which has largely created a dysfunctional gov't that has no hope of getting Ukraine out of its economic mess. Crimea voted to join Russia. The NYTs has largely over stated the European support for the USs Ukraine fiasco. In Syria there is a humanitarian disaster which Turkey and Saudi Arabia have made much worse in their determined effort to get rid of the dictator Assad. Much has been made that Assad is a much less nasty alternative than al Nursa and ISIS.
8
@c harris
What a comfort. Assad is a "much less nasty alternative than al Nursa and ISIS".
It says a lot about Bashar al-Assad that his own people would rather take up arms against him or flee the country altogether, don't you think?
What a comfort. Assad is a "much less nasty alternative than al Nursa and ISIS".
It says a lot about Bashar al-Assad that his own people would rather take up arms against him or flee the country altogether, don't you think?
1
Russia still has it's military equipment and "volunteer" soldiers in the Russian occupied regions of Donetsk. Not too long ago Ukrainian border guards intercepted stacks of rubles being smuggled into Ukraine for the Russian saboteurs sent into Ukraine. Everywhere Putin extends his reach he causes death and misery. He will not go down in history as a great leader.
1
A question for our Russian friends. How many Russian schools and train stations have been blown up by the waar mongering Americans and their allies? The Eastern Orthodox Church is just as much a target of jidhasm as is the Roman Catholic Church, the various Protestant faiths, the Jewish faith? Russia's history is full of this inability to come to grips within the many territories that make up this large country. But many of its best years were when it had an outlook and positive relationship with the west. Do Russians think the Lithuanians, Estonians, Latvians, Poles, Czechs harbor designs on Russia today? We should be working together, not opposed to each other to resolve these difficulties in the best interests of everybody.
5
Putin and Assad are mass murderers , killing Syrian children, women and men without compunction.
NATO thankfully led by the Obama administration are not prepared to sink to Putin,s level through military action.
There are other ways to solve the problem if he does not cooperate to stop the killing in Syria we should intensify sanctions including a boycott of the 2018 Soccer World Cup.
This will certainly get the attention of the Russian public, most other actions can be countered by the Putin publicity machine but losing the World Cup will get through to mst Russians as they see their country increasingly isolated.
NATO thankfully led by the Obama administration are not prepared to sink to Putin,s level through military action.
There are other ways to solve the problem if he does not cooperate to stop the killing in Syria we should intensify sanctions including a boycott of the 2018 Soccer World Cup.
This will certainly get the attention of the Russian public, most other actions can be countered by the Putin publicity machine but losing the World Cup will get through to mst Russians as they see their country increasingly isolated.
4
I don't know America will stop sanctioning and banning other nations. Economic sanctions does not work, and it will more likely fail in non-democratic governments. So, by your logic, if we apply or ban a nation, those actions will less likely to work. A vast literature on economic sanctions have some consensus on that. And again sanctions advocates miss another crucial element in international politics: nationalism. If you apply sanctions, the ruling dictators will blame America and the West to deflect their own problems or deficiences. The famous case is Russian sanctions. After the application of sanctions, Putin's popularity rose upto 80% and above from mere 50s or 60s until that time. Would not the people of Russia rose against Putin and his cronies? Why does that happen? The only explanation is nationalism. Very few Americans are aware what happens outside their own nation. There is a very virulent form of nationalism in Russia after the application of sanctions; and also the consequent rise of anti-Americanism and the tirades against the West. In fact, American strategy of sanctions failed to work in Russia, and it will never work if you based on that fallacious and simply stupid assumption that "People will rise up against the government". If you factor in nationalism, that assumption will be a non-factor. So, still you recommend sanctions?
4
The U.S. Has caused more deaths and destabilised more regimes then Russi ever has. Form Lybia to Afghanistan to Iraq to Syria. And many nations going back 50 years. Every country the U.S. Has touched has been a disaster. Russia is in Syria and close to finishing the war. They will also secure the oil pipeline that the U.S. Is fighting for (I'm sure you realise all these wars are fought for oil and energy reserves not "freedom and democracy") the U.S. Has bases all over the world and missiles pointing at Russia. Russia tried that once in Cuba and all hell broke lose. How would the U.S. Like Russian bases close to its borders? It wouldn't but this is what Russia puts up with
1
I don't know when people in the American media and in political circles mention about Western supported oppostion in Syria as benign. To be clear, those opposition groups are no better than ISIS or Al-Qaeda. In fact, a section of that group has direct affiliation with Al-Qaeda. So, to the idea of Russia attacking that nefarious group fails to provide any unconvincing reason why Syria should not be supported in that pursuit. In other words, Russia should support to attack both the opposition rebels and the Islamic State. As international politics professor, John Mearsheimer, postulated that( if someone had time to see his interview in PBS channel) supporting Syrian government under Assad remains the best way forward to defeat ISIS. Yet, he calls the "liberal imperialists"( the ruling democrats) delusion in intervening and dethroning governments( like Libya and possible Syria) only makes matters worse. In my opinion, his judgment sounds perspacious, because Assad, despite his aggressive actions, has the capability to extirpate the terrorist elements inside the nation. At least, Russia made the right policy of supporting him, and I expect the ISIS elimination in Syria. But the whole talk of supporting the Syrian opposition( terrorist groups), regime change, and lofty ideals will not help Syria, America, or for that matter Europe, who particularly face the problem of refugees.
15
Great analysis and examination of the situation in Syria. I totally agree.
The real worry is the end game of the USA/Europe. Russia has stated there end game clearly.
6
So don't keep us in suspense, tell us what their end game is.
9
How can anyone in the U.S. credibly complain about another major power "strong-arming itself into a pivotal role in the Middle East"? Over the past 15 years, U.S. "strong arming" in the region has done immeasurably more harm to its people, its economy and its political stability than actions by any other country, with enormous consequences for neighbouring regions such as Africa and Europe.
No one seems able to acknowledge that such chaos has been created in Russia's "back yard," including the NATO-backed overthrow of Ukraine's elected government. How would the U.S. react if similar massive national disintegration, political violence and population dislocation were taking place in Latin America or Canada? Would Washington be sitting by and doing nothing? Hardly. There is an amazing myopia apparent (to the rest of the world) in U.S. perspectives on the region and on its actions' implications for others.
No one seems able to acknowledge that such chaos has been created in Russia's "back yard," including the NATO-backed overthrow of Ukraine's elected government. How would the U.S. react if similar massive national disintegration, political violence and population dislocation were taking place in Latin America or Canada? Would Washington be sitting by and doing nothing? Hardly. There is an amazing myopia apparent (to the rest of the world) in U.S. perspectives on the region and on its actions' implications for others.
16
To understand Putin's thinking one must look back to pre-WW1 Russia and the Russian Empire under the last Czars. What he seeks to accomplish is (1) reintegration of the old Russian Empire, something that de facto existed with the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact, and (2) the Czarist goal of ready access to the Mediterranean. Syria represents in that mindset rectification of Russia's feeling of not getting its share of the collapsed Ottoman Empire, a penalty resulting from the withdrawal of Russia on the eastern front following the 1917 revolution. Looked at from this perspective, his actions have a certain logic in his role as a Russian nationalist, something he is above all else. That does not make his actions less dangerous to world peace, but I think it helpful to understand the genesis of his thinking.
2
@Dave
Thank you. Good historical perspective. But no need to go back that far --to understand Putin, one can start with the Cold War.
Thank you. Good historical perspective. But no need to go back that far --to understand Putin, one can start with the Cold War.
What does the Russian Empire (pre-1917) has to do with the Warsaw Pact (post-1955)?
1
What does the Russian Empire (pre-1917) has to do with the Warsaw Pact (post-1955)?
Plenty. In both cases, Russia treated its European frontiers as a forward defense against the West's potentially overwhelming power.
The pre-1917 Russian Empire's Western frontiers were formed as a defensive reaction against centuries of pressure from Poland, Sweden, Germany, and -- at one point -- Napoleonic France. The tsars ultimately conquered Poland to make certain it couldn't be used as a staging ground to invade Russia. The same is true of Finland.
Likewise, the post-1955 Warsaw Pact was Soviet Russia's attempt to solve the problems of defeat at the hands of expansionist Germany in WW1, Brest-Litovsk, the trauma of Western intervention in the Civil War, and the catastrophe of the WW2 Hitlerite invasion. From the Russian perspective, there was no reason why a hostile, powerful United States couldn't do to the USSR what the Germans had done in 1941. Hence the Russians occupied Eastern Europe to keep the Americans out.
Solzhenitsyn was correct in asserting that the Russian Empire, and to a considerable extent even the USSR, were formed for reasons of self-defense.
Plenty. In both cases, Russia treated its European frontiers as a forward defense against the West's potentially overwhelming power.
The pre-1917 Russian Empire's Western frontiers were formed as a defensive reaction against centuries of pressure from Poland, Sweden, Germany, and -- at one point -- Napoleonic France. The tsars ultimately conquered Poland to make certain it couldn't be used as a staging ground to invade Russia. The same is true of Finland.
Likewise, the post-1955 Warsaw Pact was Soviet Russia's attempt to solve the problems of defeat at the hands of expansionist Germany in WW1, Brest-Litovsk, the trauma of Western intervention in the Civil War, and the catastrophe of the WW2 Hitlerite invasion. From the Russian perspective, there was no reason why a hostile, powerful United States couldn't do to the USSR what the Germans had done in 1941. Hence the Russians occupied Eastern Europe to keep the Americans out.
Solzhenitsyn was correct in asserting that the Russian Empire, and to a considerable extent even the USSR, were formed for reasons of self-defense.
From a pragmatic perspective it seems like Putin is the only sensible player in this huge mess. How many lives has western idealism i.e. trying to bring democracy to a region that obviously doesn't want it, cost?
5
Are Russian airstrikes pragmatic? -- Have you seen any photographs of Aleppo, Damascus or Homs lately???
I think it's mostly about securing continued use of the Russian Naval facility at Tartus, Syria. They have always been paranoid about the Dardanelles as their only access to warm water.
Wars show the limits of democracy, Putin doesn’t have worry about those, but Obama, Hollande, Merkel and Cameron have to. That’s why we are in this mess.
Putin is an opportunistic man, he is no strategist. If he were, he wouldn’t have undermined Angela Merkel. He’s been severing ties all over the place, even when Russia’s reserves are running down. He has roughly 18 months to find a way out.
At least for the moment I don’t think he can force Merkel and EU to blink, not after the UK forced her (and EU’s) hand.
Putin is an opportunistic man, he is no strategist. If he were, he wouldn’t have undermined Angela Merkel. He’s been severing ties all over the place, even when Russia’s reserves are running down. He has roughly 18 months to find a way out.
At least for the moment I don’t think he can force Merkel and EU to blink, not after the UK forced her (and EU’s) hand.
4
@timoty
Believe me. At the moment, Angela Merkel is having to blink a lot because of her 'Flüchtlingspolitik' (Refugee Policy).
Believe me. At the moment, Angela Merkel is having to blink a lot because of her 'Flüchtlingspolitik' (Refugee Policy).
The questions linger over USA’s endgame in Syria after the glorious victories and exits from Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Sudan and Ukraine.
9
Amazing! An extensive article on Syria without once mentioning the Saudis. There will be no "solution" to the Syrian situation without participation from the House of Saud. Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran/Iraq are all oil oligarthies. The Syrian struggle is about whether the U.S. and Saudis or Iran and Russia will build pipelines to Syrian ports to supply oil/gas to the EU. Yes, Russia has a grudge match with Turkey, but their main target is to cripple Saudi Arabia, cutting oil production and increasing its price on the world market. All this talk about regime change is a smoke screen for Purtin's and Iran's primary motive - control of oil production in the Middle East.
3
@Hardman
Exactly!! -- Game. Set. Match.
Exactly!! -- Game. Set. Match.
1
All the players in this fiasco are oil oligarchies except for the U.S. The Saudis are using low oil prices to cripple Russia and Iran and I truly doubt either Putin or the Ayatollah will allow the suffering to continue indefinitely. The West would be wise to back away and batton down the hatches for a new wave of refugees. Saudi Arabia and Iran have been at each other throates for over two thousand years and there is a huge karmic debt accumulated which is beyond our control.
1
@Hardman
The West would also be wise to re-consider its dealings with the Saudis -- but, we all know it won't come to that.
As for refugees; with a Republican Congress, a Presidential candidate advocating more walls, and the general mood of xenophobia which has settled over the country -- there's no need to worry about a possible new wave gaining entry.
The West would also be wise to re-consider its dealings with the Saudis -- but, we all know it won't come to that.
As for refugees; with a Republican Congress, a Presidential candidate advocating more walls, and the general mood of xenophobia which has settled over the country -- there's no need to worry about a possible new wave gaining entry.
"There is a gaping loophole in the agreement in that it permits attacks against the Islamic State and the Nusra Front, an Al Qaeda affiliate, to continue. This could work in Moscow’s favor, since many of the anti-Assad groups aligned with the United States fight alongside the Nusra Front and depend on it for support"
This is awesome !
US-supported groups also fight alongside Al-Qaida and depend on it for support. An both hope for the US protection against Russia.
So cynical !
This is awesome !
US-supported groups also fight alongside Al-Qaida and depend on it for support. An both hope for the US protection against Russia.
So cynical !
4
You mean can this business top .9 percent guy manage to spend Russia's public funds as fast as we can?
1
Ha, ha, this is getting funny!
Only now have noticed the picture, where Putin stands taller than all his military. In real life, Putin is as tall as our pal El Chapo (Guzman).
Stalin used to play the same trick. Being a shorty he made sure he'd stand and look taller than the guy nest to him (using little hidden props). Back to future, comrade Putin :)))
Only now have noticed the picture, where Putin stands taller than all his military. In real life, Putin is as tall as our pal El Chapo (Guzman).
Stalin used to play the same trick. Being a shorty he made sure he'd stand and look taller than the guy nest to him (using little hidden props). Back to future, comrade Putin :)))
7
Same can be said about us in Europe, Japan, Iraq and Afghanistan, so let's not be hypocrites. We're not closing our bases in Europe or Japan until we get what we want, and we have been there way too long.
Besides, there is hope of a peace agreement coming soon in Syria, this as a result of Russia stepping in. The same cannot be said about Afghanistan where the Taliban is back to almost the same place where it was before we went there.
So thank you Russia, and let's allow that war to end. We know damm well we do not need to be involved in a war there.
Besides, there is hope of a peace agreement coming soon in Syria, this as a result of Russia stepping in. The same cannot be said about Afghanistan where the Taliban is back to almost the same place where it was before we went there.
So thank you Russia, and let's allow that war to end. We know damm well we do not need to be involved in a war there.
7
@Ordaz
So, you think there's hope of a peace agreement in Syria because Russia stepped in?? Maybe. But how long will it last??? And at what cost???
Better save your thanks until it's over for good.
So, you think there's hope of a peace agreement in Syria because Russia stepped in?? Maybe. But how long will it last??? And at what cost???
Better save your thanks until it's over for good.
Putin wants to shore up his popularity at home, but most of all he wants to improve Russians' wounded pride. Russia has intractable social problems -- alcoholism, high cancer rates, and an average male life expectancy like Rwanda's. As I've often read, most men over 60 you see in Russia are actually in their early 40s. The three Baltic republics, former Soviet Socialist Republics all, have joined NATO and the EU. Former Soviet satellites like Poland and Romania have also thrown in their lot with the West, which has a superior quality of life. Russia, once you've left the two showplace cities, is a third-world country. Russians, who are educated and curious people, know that Russia is not as advanced as the West. Putin's strutting abroad allows ordinary Russians to believe that they are a great nation.
5
What role do advanced western nations play in the Middle East?
Putin, we may not like him for thwarting our plan, is
a decisive leader and he doesn't have republicans to
throw road blocks. Advantage Putin.
Putin, we may not like him for thwarting our plan, is
a decisive leader and he doesn't have republicans to
throw road blocks. Advantage Putin.
1
“It [Russia's Syrian adventure] is very cheap, bloodless, there are no Russian victims and it is seen positively by Russian society,” Mr. Petrov intones, ignoring the atrocious human cost on the ground for innocent civilians caught in the wrong place at the wrong time through no fault of their own.
If $3 million per day is affordable for a country with dwindling foreign currency reserves, a collapsing economy and a plummeting ruble, then the fact that this sum adds up to more than $1 billion per year should be of no concern.
The cost is not going to get cheaper. As for Putin, he has now without a shadow of doubt joined Bashar al-Assad as a war criminal, whether or not Russia's UN veto power permits him ever to be held accountable.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
If $3 million per day is affordable for a country with dwindling foreign currency reserves, a collapsing economy and a plummeting ruble, then the fact that this sum adds up to more than $1 billion per year should be of no concern.
The cost is not going to get cheaper. As for Putin, he has now without a shadow of doubt joined Bashar al-Assad as a war criminal, whether or not Russia's UN veto power permits him ever to be held accountable.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
7
" dwindling foreign reserves".
Funny thing. According to the Russian National Bank, they added a cool $ 5.7bn last week.
The ruble' s drop in value is mostly against the US $ and since Russia (together with other countries) working feverishly to drop the greenback, it doesn't affect them too much.
Especially if you compare it to what th Hryvnia lost in the past year and a half - 365%, according to the Kiyiv Post yesterday.
And finally, Bashar al Assad wasn't a bad guy for the CIA rendition program, wasn't he?
Funny thing. According to the Russian National Bank, they added a cool $ 5.7bn last week.
The ruble' s drop in value is mostly against the US $ and since Russia (together with other countries) working feverishly to drop the greenback, it doesn't affect them too much.
Especially if you compare it to what th Hryvnia lost in the past year and a half - 365%, according to the Kiyiv Post yesterday.
And finally, Bashar al Assad wasn't a bad guy for the CIA rendition program, wasn't he?
"There is a gaping loophole in the agreement in that it permits attacks against the Islamic State and the Nusra Front, an Al Qaeda affiliate, to continue. This could work in Moscow’s favor, since many of the anti-Assad groups aligned with the United States fight alongside the Nusra Front and depend on it for support."
So many groups that we support fight alongside the Al Qaeda and depend on it. The question is why do we support them?
So many groups that we support fight alongside the Al Qaeda and depend on it. The question is why do we support them?
15
Because the Saudi lobby wants us to.
4
Good question?
2
Wars are easy to get into, hard to get out of. None of these sallies of Putin's can be judged a 'success' until he gets back out with a gain.
Russia's economy is tanking. Putin is starting to cannibalize the nomenclatura to get the money to keep Russia afloat. This cannot go on long ....
Russia's economy is tanking. Putin is starting to cannibalize the nomenclatura to get the money to keep Russia afloat. This cannot go on long ....
11
If Russia leaves Syria Assad is toast and Ukraine has cut off supply routes to the rebels and encircled them.
I'm not clear on how exactly does Putin cap his trifecta.
I'm not clear on how exactly does Putin cap his trifecta.
2
Russia is not going to abandon Syria. They're running the show. You don't see Lavrov hopping on a plane to fly to the US, Kerry goes to him.
Ukraine's military is deserting, with no food and no pay; Kiev is about to be abandoned by the West and Russia got what was important: Crimea.
Half of Europe is about to abandon the sanctions against Russia. The rest will follow.
Ukraine's military is deserting, with no food and no pay; Kiev is about to be abandoned by the West and Russia got what was important: Crimea.
Half of Europe is about to abandon the sanctions against Russia. The rest will follow.
9
Nothing would be easier for Russia than ending the sanctions based on its invasion of Crimea. Just get out and go back to your own territory. What would really serve American interests, short of that, would be to provide Ukraine with the defensive weapons it needs to protect itself from further incursion from its hostile neighbor. Allowing Putin to invade neighbors and annex the sovereign territory of other nations only encourages his aggressive tendencies, while harming the interests of every country that governs itself under modern principles of international law.
29
Ask Cuba about who is aggressive, annexes territory, andharms the interest of nearly every country that governs itself under international law. Here's looking at you, Dave.
4
Well, the majority of Crimean are Russians. They also know that NATO covets the strategically vital Sevastopol port. A little history and geography will clear this up for you. We allowed Kosovo to secede from Serbia, thus whats good for the goose is good for the gander
9
Make your mind up. You either support Democracy or you don't. Over 90% in Crimea voted to rejoin Russia. Subsequent polls indicate 95% still support being part of the Russian Federation. Do you support Democracy or not?
3
Before we all get wet with excitement over the sudden "partial truce" with Russia, it's best if we wait for the actual results of this underwhelming event. Putin plays his game first, last, and aways exclusively for his advantage with absolutely no concern for the game's effect on others. Like a classic Russian Matryoshka Nesting Doll, Putin has many purposes within purposes that he hides from the world.
1
This calls to mind a Bud's line from Kill Bill, "Bill thought she was smart, I say she was smart for a blonde."
Putin's winning as far as we let him win.
The reason we let him win is that our governments have no strategic doctrine and cannot see beyond their noses. The lack of forward thinking in the West and NATO is glaring. We are pre-empted by every single player regardless how small or big: Al-Qaida, Russia, ISIS, China, Hezbollah, Taliban, and counting.
Remind me again, why are we still paying our generals 6 figure salaries, while they don't even earn the minimal wage? Nor does our president, but we at least elected him and cannot complain.
Putin's winning as far as we let him win.
The reason we let him win is that our governments have no strategic doctrine and cannot see beyond their noses. The lack of forward thinking in the West and NATO is glaring. We are pre-empted by every single player regardless how small or big: Al-Qaida, Russia, ISIS, China, Hezbollah, Taliban, and counting.
Remind me again, why are we still paying our generals 6 figure salaries, while they don't even earn the minimal wage? Nor does our president, but we at least elected him and cannot complain.
2
Who is "we" and who gave "us" the divine hand to rule?
1
Putin is strategic, tactical, methodical and relentless in pursuing his agenda. Like the trained martial artist he is (Judo), he sizes up his opponent and exploits any weakness or opening he can find. That said, he is also a gambler, betting all his chips that he can disrupt the west by brazen gonzo actions on multiple fronts. He knows that the western will is weak and that democracies work slowly in recognizing danger and agreeing on a course of action. Putin requires no consensus and can act quickly and decisively and, by the time the feeble west takes some action, he has accomplished what he set out to do. Putin (as distinct from "Russia") is a tremendous threat to world order because he seeks to restore lost Soviet borders, destabilize Ukraine and cause as much instability and chaos a possible in the European Union. All the while rattling his saber and threatening to nuke anyone who counter him. Putin is dangerous and ruthless and he'll take any risk to remain in power. Keep the sanctions in place. Squeeze him hard economically. And, while we're at it, how about serving a nice cuppa polonium tea?
43
Your concluding line hits the appropriate note by recalling the U.S. history of assassinating and attempting to assassinate foreign leaders. It sums up the kind of militaristic jingoism that's made us hated around the world, and is the reason the U.S. will soon be deserted by many of its allies. Tell me -- whose wars loosed the flood of refugees on Europe (a flood that will cause more destabilization than Russia ever could -- if that were truly Putin's intent)? Whose genocidal meddling in the Middle East has made the world over consider the U.S. the greatest threat to world order? Did Russia invade Iraq, bomb Libya back to the Stone Age, fund proxy armies in Syria, sell high-tech weapons to the most backward regime on earth, the Saudis??
7
You talk like your country hasn't murdered hundreds of thousands of people.
7
A biased personal view not supported by any facts.
4
The Clinton's and Trump fall easily into bed with Putin.Self serving politicians
resolve one conflict by doing more profitable damage elsewhere.They betray us and then one another without noticing.ISIS is an Arab problem.Clinton and
Trump are our appropriate problems.Let's defeat them.
resolve one conflict by doing more profitable damage elsewhere.They betray us and then one another without noticing.ISIS is an Arab problem.Clinton and
Trump are our appropriate problems.Let's defeat them.
1
Oh please. ALL politicians are self-serving. It comes with the territory.
2
I wish Mr. Putin well. Glad it's him and his people and not us. Meanwhile, we have a country that needs a lot of improvement and a lot more democracy and that's how I am voting in the coming elections.
8
Russia and also China have always been critical of the Western doctrine on regime change, removing a (bad, oppressive) government from power as a means to bring democracy and freedom to a country. Russia is not going to be in favor of rebels taking over a country, no matter how moderate the rebels are and how bad the government is, simply because of the prospect of having a weak government that then later falls apart due to divisions, eventually causing the country to become a failed state.
Russia sees Libya as a good example of this, a better example than Iraq. In the case of Libya the focus of the intervention was focused purely on dealing with the Gaddafi regime's abuses and the West had more than enough means available to do whatever was necessary to fix the situation. The failure in Libya points to a flaw in the Western ideology about regime change as means to bring democracy, rather than a mere flaw in the way the intervention was executed.
The Russian view is that the Western intervention to bring freedom to Afghanistan gave rise to the Taliban, then came Al Qa'ida, after that ISIS arose on the scene. They are therefore a bit skeptical that after ISIS nothing else will pop up.
Russia sees Libya as a good example of this, a better example than Iraq. In the case of Libya the focus of the intervention was focused purely on dealing with the Gaddafi regime's abuses and the West had more than enough means available to do whatever was necessary to fix the situation. The failure in Libya points to a flaw in the Western ideology about regime change as means to bring democracy, rather than a mere flaw in the way the intervention was executed.
The Russian view is that the Western intervention to bring freedom to Afghanistan gave rise to the Taliban, then came Al Qa'ida, after that ISIS arose on the scene. They are therefore a bit skeptical that after ISIS nothing else will pop up.
20
Soviet invasion gave rise to the Taliban. This is not in dispute.
3
Nonsense. The Taliban arose specifically in reaction to the vicious civil war between the Afghan warlords who were armed and financed by the U.S. while the U.S. was "giving the Soviets their Vietnam" in Afghanistan. The Taliban were the children of Afghan refugees in northern Pakistan, who were raised and indoctrinated in wahhabism in Saudi-built and run madrassas. If we keep ignoring history and cause and effect, we find ourselves... well, where we are today. Who do you think gave rise to ISIS (hint: it wasn't Saddam Hussein)?
5
Any reason you forgot to bring up the Soviet-Afghan War??
As Obama would say about those he always loves to denigrate (many, many people like the pedantic child he still is), Obama himself has been "Okee Doked" (an expression he used to love - until he resolved that he has always been a fool except now it himself to which the insulting term applies). So, obviously he cannot use it anymore.
3
Sorry. Are we talking about Russia's possible endgame, or your puerile Psych evaluation of President Obama?
4
Russia is simply trying to protect itself against NATO expansion. That's Russia's chief foreign policy objective. This NYT article fails because it doesn't acknowledge this issue as the driving force behind Russia's international behavior.
There will be no endgame for Russia until the threat of NATO expansion into Ukraine is permanently ended. For the Russians, keeping NATO out of the former USSR is almost as critical as defeating the Germans was during WW2.
There will be no endgame for Russia until the threat of NATO expansion into Ukraine is permanently ended. For the Russians, keeping NATO out of the former USSR is almost as critical as defeating the Germans was during WW2.
28
Putin is simply trying to protect himself from everyone, including his own people, hundreds of thousands of whom rose to demonstrate against him in 2012, only to be silenced by his strongarm tactics at home and abroad. Countries want to join NATO BECAUSE Putin is a threat to them. The endgame is when Putin is no longer in power.
@dz
Let's look at it this way. Why is NATO inexorable in pushing eastward, instead of turning Russia's neighbors into a permanent neutral zone between the RF and the West?
Just think about how this looks to the Russians. Putin, essentially, is enforcing a Russian version of the Monroe Doctrine. NATO has forced his hand.
Let's look at it this way. Why is NATO inexorable in pushing eastward, instead of turning Russia's neighbors into a permanent neutral zone between the RF and the West?
Just think about how this looks to the Russians. Putin, essentially, is enforcing a Russian version of the Monroe Doctrine. NATO has forced his hand.
Those who desired that the US pull back from our traditional "World Policeman" role in the world, and voted Obama into office 8 years ago, should be happy of our current state of affairs. ISIS was created after the WITHDRAWAL of all US Troops from Iraq. China has built and is now arming the Spratly Islands to control the south china seas - Our response, ONE FLYOVER. North Korea, has set off a nuke, shot a few test ballistic missiles and now SF, LA, and Seattle are closer than ever to be in the crosshairs of Kim the crazy. Our response - ONLY SANCTIONS ON vert Specific companies. WHY NOT FULL SANCTIONS ON ALL OF KOREA? Half of Afganistan is once again in Tailban Control. Our response? A few more Advisors. Our Govt, has gambled the return of 100 billion back to Iran, and the lifting of sanctions on a 10 year delay in Iran joining the Nuclear Club. Bottomline is it is a GAMBLE. Our commitment to defend or stand up to the use of Chemical weapons upon civilians (or anyone) was first trumpeted, by Obama "Red Line" in syria, then accepted by Hillary and Obama with a response of SILENCE. The Russian Land Grab in Crimea was accepted with Sanctions that are still ongoing, but one wonders for HOW LONG . An Airliner with 300 soles was shot down by Russian backed fighters, but nothing from the once proud USA is done to hold them accountable. As was the Little Green Men in Crimea or the east of Ukraine. Russia is playing Obama and Kerry for fools in Syria as we speak.
6
And you want to start World War III with the Russians and Chinese over any of this? Count me out. We've got the arsenal to defend our homeland and none of those jokers doubts it, and that's good enough for me.
7
@chimanimani
But do you remember who got us into Iraq in the first place???...
But do you remember who got us into Iraq in the first place???...
5
I must disagree with you, ISIS was created mostly from the ex Iraqi soldiers that American forces threw into the streets and into jail after toppling Saddam. The Taliban were created by American cover operations against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, we help them devlope there gorrila tactics to defeat the Soviet and it is this tactics that they use to attach allied forces in Afghanistan now. In Ukraine it is no secret that the CIA helped instiage the toppling of the previous Ukrainian president, Russia had no choice but to respond. Imagine if Russia used its secret services to help topple the goverment of Canada! In lybia, used out NATO forces to overthrow the lybian leader for the advantage of very fine oil, and little care about what the lybian nation would turn to afer. In Iran we make the mistake of pushing away a strong Iranian nation, thus in turn they look for better way to protect themselves. In the overall middle Eastern region we are allies of countries that take advantage of there minorities, have horrible rihts records that care very little about what we want as a nation and use the leverage that they have on our goverment for there advantage, that goes for Israel , Turky and sausi Arabia. We are to blaim for the majority of the problems we face. Our failed policies have taken us into a whole we can't seem to get out of. Period
5
It's an election year in the US, and Putin takes advantage of it.
Obama, avoiding conflict be nature ( see line in the sand in Syria ) is even less inclined now to risk anything, lest it impedes the chances of a Democratic successor.
No hope or change for Syrian refugees yearning to be free... it's election time.
Obama, avoiding conflict be nature ( see line in the sand in Syria ) is even less inclined now to risk anything, lest it impedes the chances of a Democratic successor.
No hope or change for Syrian refugees yearning to be free... it's election time.
3
@Talesofgenji
Just for the record. This problem existed long before election time, and longer than Obama has been President. As for Syria, there's always lots of talk from the sidelines--but would YOU be willing to go???... or send anyone you know???
Just for the record. This problem existed long before election time, and longer than Obama has been President. As for Syria, there's always lots of talk from the sidelines--but would YOU be willing to go???... or send anyone you know???
6
Russia saved Europe in WWII and will save it again in like 20-30 years when,flooded with Muslims, there will be a new war started by the Islamists settled in Europe who ll demand their caliphate. Edgar Cayce and many others psychics predicted that. They are actually fighting the Islamic state now in Syria by supporting Assad and fighting the Saudi and Emirates backed Sunni Sunni Fundamentalists. But the US is too myopic to see this because the sunny lobby wags us with big words about human rights.
15
@Mytwocents
"Russia saved Europe in WWII..."
I not only beg to differ, but wonder how you came to that conclusion.
"Russia saved Europe in WWII..."
I not only beg to differ, but wonder how you came to that conclusion.
2
Yes, I do not like Russia any more than you guys because it invaded my country and turned it to communist. However, 11 million Russian soldiers died to fight off Hitler and defeat him.The 400,000 American soldiers wouldnt have been enough. The US decided to land in Normandie not on the Black Sea Coast where the human costs would have been higher but the Eastern Europe would have been saved from 50 years of bloody communism.
3
@Mytwocents
FYI. The Allies' decision to land in Normandy had NOTHING to do with Russia, or the Black Sea Coast. Want to know why??? -- just look at the map.
FYI. The Allies' decision to land in Normandy had NOTHING to do with Russia, or the Black Sea Coast. Want to know why??? -- just look at the map.
The article must have hit a nerve because I have never seen so many obviously false names and addresses concealing Russian commentators. One thing to remember is that Putin is not terribly bright. Prior to the collapse of the USSR he was in a dead end job in Dresden, East Germany (the most reliably communist country in the USSR's orbit). In addition, he didn't speak any English (bright KGB agents were always taught English). Together this means that he was considered anything but a star. I suspect that much of what he does is simply improvisation. In other words: he doesn't have an endgame
22
Ian,
Putin may not be bright but he's clever. He does have an endgame, and it's the same game he was playing as a KGB operative: find and exploit weak points in the West in order to weaken it.
You might say it's an irrational goal and I would've agreed with you. Russia was offered cooperation with the West but chose a confrontation instead.
However, irrational as it may look, this goal serves well to promote Russian existential narrative (its love-hate affair with the more advanced West). That narrative whips up the nationalism and makes the people coalesce around their ruler.
Did you know that Russians used to call their czars 'father' ('dear father' to be exact)?
Putin may not be bright but he's clever. He does have an endgame, and it's the same game he was playing as a KGB operative: find and exploit weak points in the West in order to weaken it.
You might say it's an irrational goal and I would've agreed with you. Russia was offered cooperation with the West but chose a confrontation instead.
However, irrational as it may look, this goal serves well to promote Russian existential narrative (its love-hate affair with the more advanced West). That narrative whips up the nationalism and makes the people coalesce around their ruler.
Did you know that Russians used to call their czars 'father' ('dear father' to be exact)?
4
Putin should only enjoy his victory in Syria as much as the U.S. has enjoyed its victory in Iraq.
11
In all fairness, Sheldon, Putin did not start the war in Syria. Putin just entered at the end of Sept. 2015, approx. 5 months ago. Iraq was a different situation.
4
Doesn't look like a winning streak to me. Putin will be lucky to avoid prison or worse. Just a matter of time. Meanwhile Russia has many internal tensions and an economy that is unsustainable.
5
Looking at the current crop of Western leaders, lead by the oh-so-reluctant warrior' Obama(sarcasm alert), one would have to believe Putin is going to emerge the big winner.
6
Putin is winning because he is up against a weak US president who he dosen't respect and certainly does not fear.
5
Putin is "winning" because the U.S. is not actively engaging -- winning isn't everything. And there would be NO winners in event of a full-scale nuclear war.
1
Putin Is on a Winning Streak, but Can He Cash In?
For every winner there is a loser: Here it is the US
The US Mid Eastern Policy has been singularly inept, under both Bush under Obama.
...we supported Iraq reconquest of Ramadi, while at the same time Iraqi Shia troops, fight side by side with Russians in Syria against the rebels we support... It's schizophrenic...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia-Syria-Iran-Iraq_Coalition
For every winner there is a loser: Here it is the US
The US Mid Eastern Policy has been singularly inept, under both Bush under Obama.
...we supported Iraq reconquest of Ramadi, while at the same time Iraqi Shia troops, fight side by side with Russians in Syria against the rebels we support... It's schizophrenic...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia-Syria-Iran-Iraq_Coalition
10
We must not join in Putin's myopic loss of the big picture. Putin may or may not be "winning" a battle or diplomatic struggle in the short term, but he does so at the cost of digging a deeper and deeper whole for the Russian economy, all the while making more enemies every step of the way. Sanctions and the collapse in the price of oil are important and do limit Putin's military adventurism in the near term, but, in the long term, they only hasten the continuing decline of the Russian economy. Russia remains a klepto-petro-state with an outmoded economy designed for a distant era. Putin may be able to secure and hold on to his Syrian base, he may even manage to split Europe and weaken or eliminate the sanctions on Russia, but none of that will come close to creating a modern economy needed to sustain a major military power over the long term. Putin has done remarkably little to solve Russia's real problems. Indeed, he has made Russia's prospects far worse, such as by scaring off crucial investment by reversing any progress made in establishing the rule of law in Russia. Putin's kleptocratic squandering of Russian oil wealth is only made worse by his expenditure of resources in Crimea/Ukraine and Syria. As the fossil fuel era gradually winds to a close, the extremely oil-dependent Russian economy is a sinking ship. Captain Putin seems to think that piling weapons and ammunition on deck will stop the sinking. It will not. It is a weight that will only hasten the inevitable.
16
The author of this article points out that the Sunni majority in Syria is angry with Russia. No doubt. But as he further claims, Russia's long-term motives are murky. One thing seems certain: Russia can't be expending all this effort to promote a Shia (Iranian) hegemony. Their goal must be to turn Syria and Lebanon into client states The only way to do this is to court the Sunni majority. So what if Russia's long game is to allow Assad to win up to a certain point, then push him aside in favour of a regime that is much more broadly acceptable, but beholden to Russia?
It isn't just Syria and Lebanon that may be in the Russians' sites. The whole Sunni Middle East is in need of support, whether against Iran and Hezbollah, the Brotherhood backed by Turkey, or the Jihadists. And the Kurds are worried about Turkey. Where can they all turn except to Russia? And even the Israelis, especially Russian Israelis, are increasingly sceptical about that country's exclusive reliance on the US and its increasingly detached Jews. Perhaps then, Russia sees an opening here that will allow it to become the patron of the region as a whole: the Arab Levant, Egypt, Israel, and much of the Sunni gulf. And who's to say that's such a bad thing if, among other things, it leads to an end of the Israeli-Palestinian quagmire.
It isn't just Syria and Lebanon that may be in the Russians' sites. The whole Sunni Middle East is in need of support, whether against Iran and Hezbollah, the Brotherhood backed by Turkey, or the Jihadists. And the Kurds are worried about Turkey. Where can they all turn except to Russia? And even the Israelis, especially Russian Israelis, are increasingly sceptical about that country's exclusive reliance on the US and its increasingly detached Jews. Perhaps then, Russia sees an opening here that will allow it to become the patron of the region as a whole: the Arab Levant, Egypt, Israel, and much of the Sunni gulf. And who's to say that's such a bad thing if, among other things, it leads to an end of the Israeli-Palestinian quagmire.
7
Dos vadanya on that one buddy!
1
"So Moscow most likely views the tougher course of exploiting divisions in Europe as its best chance to end sanctions."
It is vital that the developed democracies in Europe join the US and Canada in tightening the sanctions as much as possible. The showdown between "rule of law" nations and "rule of man" nations is fast approaching. The failed age of "engagement", so encouraged by the West's narrow business interests, is coming to and end. If the very concept of the nation-state is to survive, we must draw a line here and now!
It is vital that the developed democracies in Europe join the US and Canada in tightening the sanctions as much as possible. The showdown between "rule of law" nations and "rule of man" nations is fast approaching. The failed age of "engagement", so encouraged by the West's narrow business interests, is coming to and end. If the very concept of the nation-state is to survive, we must draw a line here and now!
5
You mean like democrazy in Libya or Afghanistan or Iraq?? Riiiiiight
7
Developed democracies I wrote.
1
It's a general understanding that when one tries to "play by the rules" and one's opponent does not, and has no scruples, it is much more difficult to prevail....not impossible, just more difficult.
You can see this playing out with Russia, also with GOP politics.
You can see this playing out with Russia, also with GOP politics.
5
In May 2014, President Obama said, "“Russia is a regional power that is threatening some of its immediate neighbors — not out of strength but out of weakness,”" Sort of reminiscent of his Islamic State "Junior Varsity" comment. Unfortunately for all of us, the president will likely be remembered by future historians more for his foreign policy gaffes than for any of his foreign policy accomplishments.
9
Nothing you stated proves Obama wrong. Russia is "winning" only because Putin doesn't care what is "lost". Just remember, Bush declared mission accomplished after the invasion of Iraq. Don't expect Putin's ability to walk away from Turkey, Syria, Ukraine, etc. any easier.
7
You and this "JV" nonsense. The Wehrmacht, the Red Army, the Mongol Hordes, and the Army of Northern Va were the varsity. ISIS isn't even the JV, they're the 6th grade CYO team. And "BOO," they're steaming up the Chesapeake Bay to get you right now, better run......you people are pathetic in your fear. Try another meme that actually makes sense.
6
@ Tastes Better
And if those "gaffes" include keeping this country out of a full-fledged World War, historians would be right to remember the President's foreign policy.
And if those "gaffes" include keeping this country out of a full-fledged World War, historians would be right to remember the President's foreign policy.
Putin has been lucky in his adversaries: a corrupt Ukrainian government; a hapless bunch of Islamic would-be revolutionaries in Syria; and an EU without a real political authority facing an unprecedented influx of refugees that no one wants. The U.S. has imposed sanctions, but we don't see anything to gain by pushing the Russians too hard. Putin's leadership style gives us a taste of what the U.S. would be like if Donald Trump was president: He whips up the Russian nationalists and xenophobes, makes some relatively low-cost incursions into places like Ukraine and Syria, and waits for his opponents to self-destruct.
2
Dude, we should be pleading with Putin to cooperate, the alternatives are far worse. Unless that is the plan, of course.
6
I agree with you 95%, except for the low-cost and self-destruct part. It is not low-cost for Russia, which is doing very, very poorly economically, and in fact that is the likely impetus for military excursions. His opponents do not self-destruct, there is nothing to self-destruct. Putin's adventurism does not help the West, but it does little practical damage. Sure Assad is ahead now, but no in the West cares that much.
1
"Russian intervention in Syria was meant to confirm Moscow’s role as a dependable partner... But instead of attacking the Islamic State, Russia went after Western allies in the Syrian opposition..."
You mean Russia went after the West-backed terrorist death squads, aligned with the Islamic State, in sovereign Syria? Since when are Al-Qaeda and Al-Nusra our allies? I'm outraged the US Pentagon and CIA overtly and covertly trains, arms, and funds mercenary terrorists in an attempt to take down the legitimate foreign government of Syria.
Hillary Clinton supported US-led regime change in: Belgrade 1999, Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003, Honduran coup 2009, Libya 2011, and wanted a 'No Fly Zone' in Syria to dismember it. For what? Increased civilian deaths? Increased state chaos? Increased corruption?
Who is behind of this disruption? I was startled to read in yesterday's NYT a quote by François Heisbourg, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London, who appeared to be threatening our president. Heisbourg first described Obama as "feckless" for not bombing Syria in 2013 after the false flag Ghouta chemical attack*, and then said, “The next U.S. president is going to have to demonstrate early on — in circumstances that he or she would have preferred to avoid — that this was an Obama moment, not an America moment.”
What is that supposed to mean?
* http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
You mean Russia went after the West-backed terrorist death squads, aligned with the Islamic State, in sovereign Syria? Since when are Al-Qaeda and Al-Nusra our allies? I'm outraged the US Pentagon and CIA overtly and covertly trains, arms, and funds mercenary terrorists in an attempt to take down the legitimate foreign government of Syria.
Hillary Clinton supported US-led regime change in: Belgrade 1999, Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003, Honduran coup 2009, Libya 2011, and wanted a 'No Fly Zone' in Syria to dismember it. For what? Increased civilian deaths? Increased state chaos? Increased corruption?
Who is behind of this disruption? I was startled to read in yesterday's NYT a quote by François Heisbourg, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London, who appeared to be threatening our president. Heisbourg first described Obama as "feckless" for not bombing Syria in 2013 after the false flag Ghouta chemical attack*, and then said, “The next U.S. president is going to have to demonstrate early on — in circumstances that he or she would have preferred to avoid — that this was an Obama moment, not an America moment.”
What is that supposed to mean?
* http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
31
I say it's time to pull out the playbook we used during Charlie Wilson's day and bleed the Russian bear yet again. Their propaganda machine - domestic and foreign (RT being the prime example) - is puffing them up to be a global superpower when the reality is otherwise. It's still a second rater and we can bring them to their knees economically.
Squeeze them until the babushkas howl for borscht. That's the only language the Kremlin understands, unfortunately.
Squeeze them until the babushkas howl for borscht. That's the only language the Kremlin understands, unfortunately.
6
Putin, unlike Obama, does not have to deal with the on-going and incurable racist opposition party which during his entire tenure has done all it can to obstruct anything he offers.
4
Putin is thug. Pure and simple. The West should be united in opposing his moves in Ukraine, Syria, and anywhere else he sticks his nose into.
30
Putin is winning for an obvious and trivial reason.
The West has collectively lost the desire for victory. We paly for the comfort of not losing, while he takes the risk of playing to win.
So, stop pointing fingers and start looking in the mirror.
The West has collectively lost the desire for victory. We paly for the comfort of not losing, while he takes the risk of playing to win.
So, stop pointing fingers and start looking in the mirror.
6
@al
And will looking in the mirror come any easier when the body-bags start piling up???
And will looking in the mirror come any easier when the body-bags start piling up???
@Smith
Those who don't fight for dignity won't have one.
Those who don't fight for dignity won't have one.
1
@al
And are YOU willing to be in one of those body bags?
Death trumps dignity every time.
And are YOU willing to be in one of those body bags?
Death trumps dignity every time.
Gee! America's external regime change policies in Iraq, Libya, Syria, the Ukraine, Crimea, and Iran were short-sighted, un-thought out, and doomed to failure. What a surprise! Who could've predicted that Russia would regard the Crimea as a de facto part of itself? Who could have predicted that the overthrow of a duly elected President of the Ukraine would seem like a war-like act by Russia, and by lots of Ukrainians, especially since key powers that supported the coup had roots in fascist, Nazi opposition to Russia in World War II?. Who could have predicted Syria would not want to join up with Wahhabi Sunni and Saudi Arabia and our CIA? Who could have predicted that ISIS would take over parts of Syria and Iraq? Okay, maybe Putin did, and that's why we have to demonize him as a new Stalin and start up a new cold war. Who cares if our violent external regime change policies nearly always makes things worse. It better to seem strong, no matter what unnecessary bad thing happen We hate Putin, right? He's a sleazy know-it-all who seems to be against things that so often make things much worse for us than they were.
57
Nice regurgitation of classic Russian propaganda, comrade. May sound believable to the jingoistic Russian citizens. But it's of too low quality for "The New York Times". How much do they pay people for getting rid of their morals and pangs of conscience with the current sinking oil prices? Not much I'm afraid.
Well just like the USSR this house of cards will fall, unfortunately we will have a messier time picking up the pieces.
1
Does Putin have dandruff? His gesture would indicate that. Already in USSR the product Head and Shoulders was available.
3
I do not follow this often. But "since many of the anti-Assad groups aligned with the United States fight alongside the Nusra Front and depend on it for support." - this association with those UN-designated terrorist groups will only hurt us. How could we end up with this?
11
Enjoy your short term success. History has and always will repeat itself because leaders such as Putin cannot fathom the truth as it gets in the way of their own fantasy.
The question we should be asking now is not what Putin's "end game" may be in Syria or Ukraine, that is already obvious, i.e., to regain Russia's lost glory as a 1st-rate superpower. Rather, our worrisome question should be how Putin, in doing so, could so easily have out-maneuver Barack Obama and his team of naive or inexperienced National Security advisers...!
No sane person is suggesting confronting Russia militarily. However, Putin and his Foreign Minister know when they are dealing with a weak and naive American leadership. When a American president begins his term by naively "apologizing" for U.S. forceful leadership in the past, and believing that broad smiles and concessions galore win friends abroad, dictators take advantage !
No sane person is suggesting confronting Russia militarily. However, Putin and his Foreign Minister know when they are dealing with a weak and naive American leadership. When a American president begins his term by naively "apologizing" for U.S. forceful leadership in the past, and believing that broad smiles and concessions galore win friends abroad, dictators take advantage !
3
@Jacques Henry
By terming the American leadership as "weak and naive", it sounds as though you ARE suggesting a military confrontation with Russia.
By terming the American leadership as "weak and naive", it sounds as though you ARE suggesting a military confrontation with Russia.
1
Not at all. I suggest you re-read my points above to better understand. I am implying the need for stronger American leadership around the World and its corollary ability to drive a tough bargain. In brief, the opposite of Obama-Kerry-Rice negotiation style which often begins with Obama's taking options off the table without getting anything in return, e.g., caving on his own "Red Line", and his promises of "No Boots on the Ground" before taking full measure of his opponents.
1
@Jacques Henry
Thank you. No need to re-read your points. I already understand what you said.
But as to your response, just who/what are you suggesting in terms of "stronger American leadership"?
Are YOU prepared to be a pair of 'Boots on the Ground'?
Thank you. No need to re-read your points. I already understand what you said.
But as to your response, just who/what are you suggesting in terms of "stronger American leadership"?
Are YOU prepared to be a pair of 'Boots on the Ground'?
Western opinion of Putin tends to be inaccurate in both directions. On one hand, he is portrayed by critics as some kind of cackling Bond villain. On the other hand, he is portrayed by fans (most conveniently live far away from Putin's Russia) as a man misunderstood. These people bend over backwards to portray Putin as some kind of hero to the world, who is unfairly demonized by corrupt Western media and political establishment.
The truth is neither of the above. Putin is a ruthless bully, but he doesn't see it that way. That's because has a 19th century view of the world. He believes in a world dominated by Great Powers each with a sphere of influence, and firmly believes Russia is a Great Power.
You can see this in Russia's foreign policy and in his comment lamenting the old days when Super Powers ruled the world (quoted in this article.) He expects smaller countries in Russia's "backyard" - Poland, Ukraine, Baltic States, Caucasus States - to look to Russia as "the boss." He keeps out of other Great Power's backyards, so you do not see Soviet era dabbling in Latin America, Africa, or Southeast Asia. But if a Great Power tries to build relationships with smaller countries in Russia's "backyard," or if those smaller countries tries to break from Russian orbit, Putin calls that "aggression."
Putin is not some Bond villain looking for world domination, but that hardly matters for Russia's neighbors. For them, the real Putin is scary enough.
The truth is neither of the above. Putin is a ruthless bully, but he doesn't see it that way. That's because has a 19th century view of the world. He believes in a world dominated by Great Powers each with a sphere of influence, and firmly believes Russia is a Great Power.
You can see this in Russia's foreign policy and in his comment lamenting the old days when Super Powers ruled the world (quoted in this article.) He expects smaller countries in Russia's "backyard" - Poland, Ukraine, Baltic States, Caucasus States - to look to Russia as "the boss." He keeps out of other Great Power's backyards, so you do not see Soviet era dabbling in Latin America, Africa, or Southeast Asia. But if a Great Power tries to build relationships with smaller countries in Russia's "backyard," or if those smaller countries tries to break from Russian orbit, Putin calls that "aggression."
Putin is not some Bond villain looking for world domination, but that hardly matters for Russia's neighbors. For them, the real Putin is scary enough.
8
Twenty five million Russian people were killed by the Nazis in the second world war. When that war ended Russia was once again threatened by western forces. Nato forces are now on Russia`s borders. The people of Russia live in fear of an American led invasion. This is the reality of the situation.
The neocons who control US foreign policy make no secret of the fact that their "endgame" is regime change in Russia. Our New York Times supported regime change in Iraq and Libya and is now in the forefront of regime change in Syria. Hundreds of thousands of people have died because of US interference in that region of the world. Germany has accepted one million refugees fleeing from their bombed out countries.
Is it not time now for the Pentagon and the US/UK media to think about the harm they have done to millions of innocent people including many honest US soldiers. Pleas stop preaching -and killing-from your "high moral ground". The American people will not be fooled much longer.
The neocons who control US foreign policy make no secret of the fact that their "endgame" is regime change in Russia. Our New York Times supported regime change in Iraq and Libya and is now in the forefront of regime change in Syria. Hundreds of thousands of people have died because of US interference in that region of the world. Germany has accepted one million refugees fleeing from their bombed out countries.
Is it not time now for the Pentagon and the US/UK media to think about the harm they have done to millions of innocent people including many honest US soldiers. Pleas stop preaching -and killing-from your "high moral ground". The American people will not be fooled much longer.
75
You've either been hoodwinked by Russian propaganda or you're misinformed. The Soviet Union brutally repressed countries in east-and-central Europe for over four decades after WWII. Once the the USSR fell, the Soviets' former vassals embraced democracy and their peoples voted to join NATO, as well as the EU, in order to protect them from a revanchist Russia, a case that has transpired.
In the Middle East, the US has made mistakes, but not after trying to establish democracies after decades of repressive dictatorships. Failure in the region doesn't make America's moral high ground any less so, though you appear to favor totalitarian regimes and undisciplined soldiers indiscriminately killing civilians.
In the Middle East, the US has made mistakes, but not after trying to establish democracies after decades of repressive dictatorships. Failure in the region doesn't make America's moral high ground any less so, though you appear to favor totalitarian regimes and undisciplined soldiers indiscriminately killing civilians.
19
Are you Polish? Thought so
2
@Dominick
NATO is not on Russia's borders, unless you think all of Europe is part of Russia.
NATO is not on Russia's borders, unless you think all of Europe is part of Russia.
2
GWOT was a scam meant to ensure US domination in Eurasia. Seems though that US foreign policy has back fired.... ISIS is just another tool to keep Russia and China off balance while US retreats to lick its wounds.
10
All these comments illustrate how successful the propaganda of demonizing other govt's or leader who do not follow western agenda is working...at first you use Al Qaeda a.k.a ISIS a.k.a Moderate rebels to overthrow legitimate govt's in Libya and Syria in the name of Arab spring, engineer a coup against legitimate govt in Kiev to install a puppet and those who oppose your terrorism are labelled as "brutal dictator" or "Autocrat Putin"....we should ask ourselves...in the end...is it really worth playing with innocent lives( 470k in Syria alone) to pursue imperialistic ambitions?
47
@Prasad
Mr. Putin's extravagant expansion plans and intrusion into the Syrian quagmire speak for themselves. There is no need of any propaganda to "demonize" him.
Mr. Putin's extravagant expansion plans and intrusion into the Syrian quagmire speak for themselves. There is no need of any propaganda to "demonize" him.
1
I sincerely do not understand your logic: US was in Syria for years before Russia. Who gave it a right to be there?! Russia, however, is there at the invitation of the legitimate Syrian government.
1
@Olga
It's very easy to understand. The Syrian "invitation" involves supporting Mr. Assad, even if that means bombing the country into extinction. And in exchange, Russia can maintain access to its naval base at Tartus and expand its military involvement in the region.
But here's the question. How "legitimate" is a government that continues to slay its own people???
It's very easy to understand. The Syrian "invitation" involves supporting Mr. Assad, even if that means bombing the country into extinction. And in exchange, Russia can maintain access to its naval base at Tartus and expand its military involvement in the region.
But here's the question. How "legitimate" is a government that continues to slay its own people???
Putin has concluded he is more likely to stay in power by pursuing confrontation with the West, rather than open interchange. Confrontation with the West and appeals to nationalism are the playbook of the North Korean and Iranian dictators. And it work...for the despot. But it won't work for the Russian economy. In Georgia, Crimea, Ukraine, Putin has succeeded in surrounding his weak economic center with a weaker economic periphery. The real risk here for the West is that, once started down this road, Putin can only go back to the "drug" of confrontation and nationalism. We have to quietly prepare for that.
35
The Russian economy is weak and excessively oil/commodities driven but rapprochement with the West is actually not at all the answer.
Their main task lying ahead is economic diversification through import substitution as the first step - Russia is currently a place where even toilet paper and toothpaste are occasionally imported. Opening the economy to the West so that Western manufacturers can dump EU-made goods (principally in Poland and the Czech Republic mind you) into Russia is hardly a winning situation.
As much as we may disagree with Putin, the economic wall with the West is absolutely the right solution as far as resolving this specific issue - why would we expect Russia to neglect its own economic development in favor of subsidizing countries like Poland which are openly antagonistic at every occasion to Russian interests?
Their main task lying ahead is economic diversification through import substitution as the first step - Russia is currently a place where even toilet paper and toothpaste are occasionally imported. Opening the economy to the West so that Western manufacturers can dump EU-made goods (principally in Poland and the Czech Republic mind you) into Russia is hardly a winning situation.
As much as we may disagree with Putin, the economic wall with the West is absolutely the right solution as far as resolving this specific issue - why would we expect Russia to neglect its own economic development in favor of subsidizing countries like Poland which are openly antagonistic at every occasion to Russian interests?
1
Pursuing confrontation and appealing to nationalism should be quite familiar strategies to anyone following the GOP presidential campaign... but of course Russia is 'evil' and America is 'good', so it's different.
"Confrontation" and "appeals to nationalism" describe the strategies of the majority of US Presidential hopefuls - maybe we should "quietly prepare" for that!
Russia's economy entered into negative growth during Q3 of 2014 and is ongoing. That is 5 consecutive quarters of economic decline, longer than the duration of its recession in the 2008-2009 global financial crisis (though not as severe).
The ruble hovers at historically high level between 75-80 rubles/US$; it was about 37 rubles/US$ in 3/2014, at the time of Crimea crisis. That is more than 50% depreciation of the ruble in less than 2 years. Russia's foreign reserve was about $490 billion in 3/2014. Today it is about 20% less, at $382 billion.
As long as Putin remains as head of Russia, it will continue to see its once most strategically important friend, Ukraine, drifting further away from it. Today, its friends outside of former USSR consist of Syria and sometimes Iran. China is the dominant player in the Sino-Russia relationship, something that has not happened in 200 years. Now it is potentially getting bogged in another foreign civil war.
Putin's military aggression abroad is evidence of his weakness, not strength.
Politicians the world over have been playing the same card -- to divert domestic woes by blaming foreigners and initiate patriotic aggressions.
Is his record any rational observer's idea of a strong, cunning, successful leader?
The ruble hovers at historically high level between 75-80 rubles/US$; it was about 37 rubles/US$ in 3/2014, at the time of Crimea crisis. That is more than 50% depreciation of the ruble in less than 2 years. Russia's foreign reserve was about $490 billion in 3/2014. Today it is about 20% less, at $382 billion.
As long as Putin remains as head of Russia, it will continue to see its once most strategically important friend, Ukraine, drifting further away from it. Today, its friends outside of former USSR consist of Syria and sometimes Iran. China is the dominant player in the Sino-Russia relationship, something that has not happened in 200 years. Now it is potentially getting bogged in another foreign civil war.
Putin's military aggression abroad is evidence of his weakness, not strength.
Politicians the world over have been playing the same card -- to divert domestic woes by blaming foreigners and initiate patriotic aggressions.
Is his record any rational observer's idea of a strong, cunning, successful leader?
35
It's an immensely complex topic but here are several things to look at as well. First, look at a map of Europe prior to World War II and I - if you start comparing the borders, you see a reason for many of these problems in eastern Europe. Effectively, similar to Sykes-Picot in the Middle East, the borders were drawn and imposed artificially by Western Europeans. Western Ukraine uses a Slavic language closer to Polish in syntax and vocabulary while Eastern Ukraine uses Russian - this persists even today with Kiev as a rough border between the two groups. Russia doesn't care at all about Lviv or the West of Ukraine that's basically Poland to them - they just want the Eastern, Russian-speaking part.
The Ruble decline is arguably a good thing - without it, you would have seen a 1998 style crisis with high contagion globally and we would likely be facing a Depression scenario with that atop of 2009 - caused by our dear old friends in NYC. Reserves are declining but that's what they're for - go look at how much China is burning in a desperate attempt to hide cracks in their facade now.
Finally, the Russians and the Chinese talk a lot and collaborate when it mutually suits their interests but neither have any deeper connection to each other than that. As it turns out, however, they have a mutual interest in raising pressure on the US and EU - the Russians do this with Ukraine and Syria and China with NK, South China islands and Japan. Simple as that.
The Ruble decline is arguably a good thing - without it, you would have seen a 1998 style crisis with high contagion globally and we would likely be facing a Depression scenario with that atop of 2009 - caused by our dear old friends in NYC. Reserves are declining but that's what they're for - go look at how much China is burning in a desperate attempt to hide cracks in their facade now.
Finally, the Russians and the Chinese talk a lot and collaborate when it mutually suits their interests but neither have any deeper connection to each other than that. As it turns out, however, they have a mutual interest in raising pressure on the US and EU - the Russians do this with Ukraine and Syria and China with NK, South China islands and Japan. Simple as that.
2
Putin's aggression abroad, hmm... Care to look at your country's actions and compare? And also, it is not for any foreigner to dictate and decide who should be at the head of a sovereign country. I know, this is an American habit, but sorry - not with a SOVEREIGN country that Russia is. Mr. Putin has our total support, both in Syria and in Ukraine, sorry to disappoint you.
1
This is classic western propaganda. Fortunately, alternate news sources provide sufficient enlightenment to pass this article off as actually comical.
Thankfully, seasoned statesmen guide Russia’s foreign policy, and their actions internationally have been an effective offset to our long stream of neocon and neoliberal plundering and destabilizing.
Russia is clearly succeeding in doing what many active and retired Pentagon officials have openly agreed with, stabilizing the Assad government to effectively defeat our enemy – the radical Islamic terrorists that group shiftingly under a wide variety of names – and to effect a peaceful leadership transition guided by the citizens of Syria. We should all applaud Russia’s momentum and thank him for keeping us from committing yet another regime change atrocity.
On the subject of regime change atrocities, Russia continues to be deftly and positively engaged in the Ukrainian civil war despite the horrendous disfunctionality of the Ukrainian government and their obvious inability to uphold their end of the peace agreement. Our support of the coup d’état was as embarrassingly obvious as it was a humanitarian and political disaster. We should all applaud Russia’s steady hand during this blundering idiocy of western arrogance and aggression.
I could go on, and on, and on. This is simplistic propaganda, and we’re not buying it.
Thankfully, seasoned statesmen guide Russia’s foreign policy, and their actions internationally have been an effective offset to our long stream of neocon and neoliberal plundering and destabilizing.
Russia is clearly succeeding in doing what many active and retired Pentagon officials have openly agreed with, stabilizing the Assad government to effectively defeat our enemy – the radical Islamic terrorists that group shiftingly under a wide variety of names – and to effect a peaceful leadership transition guided by the citizens of Syria. We should all applaud Russia’s momentum and thank him for keeping us from committing yet another regime change atrocity.
On the subject of regime change atrocities, Russia continues to be deftly and positively engaged in the Ukrainian civil war despite the horrendous disfunctionality of the Ukrainian government and their obvious inability to uphold their end of the peace agreement. Our support of the coup d’état was as embarrassingly obvious as it was a humanitarian and political disaster. We should all applaud Russia’s steady hand during this blundering idiocy of western arrogance and aggression.
I could go on, and on, and on. This is simplistic propaganda, and we’re not buying it.
122
I'm certainly reading propaganda, but it's not the article.
78
"Russia continues to be deftly and positively engaged in the Ukrainian civil war..."
An interesting spin. Russian military operations (acknowledged by Putin) in a neighboring sovereign country are an act of war. That war has already cost 9K of Ukrainian lives and several hundreds of Russian ones.
That 'deft and positive engagement' continues destabilizing a sovereign European country and costing more lives and causing more destruction and misery just as we're typing our comments.
These are facts, and they have nothing to do with either 'simplistic' Western propaganda or 'sophisticated' one of your kind.
An interesting spin. Russian military operations (acknowledged by Putin) in a neighboring sovereign country are an act of war. That war has already cost 9K of Ukrainian lives and several hundreds of Russian ones.
That 'deft and positive engagement' continues destabilizing a sovereign European country and costing more lives and causing more destruction and misery just as we're typing our comments.
These are facts, and they have nothing to do with either 'simplistic' Western propaganda or 'sophisticated' one of your kind.
26
"Russia is clearly succeeding in doing what many active and retired Pentagon officials have openly agreed with, stabilizing the Assad government to effectively defeat our enemy "
The US should have formed a grand alliance with Russia and India to defeat radical Islam, but our Dear Leader can not even say "Islamic militants".
The US should have formed a grand alliance with Russia and India to defeat radical Islam, but our Dear Leader can not even say "Islamic militants".
5
Just how smart is Putin? The US was enjoying the greatest surplus in history when George Bush squandered it (among other things) on foolishly invading Iraq. If that can affect this economy then just how will these forays in Syria, Ukraine and others, going to affect the Russian economy especially when the cost of oil has dramatically fallen?
How long is it going to be before the average Russian is going to want Putin to spend money on them rather than on Syria?
How long is it going to be before the average Russian is going to want Putin to spend money on them rather than on Syria?
2
Syrian adventure is paid for from military budget allocated for military training. There is a lot more where that came from. Not to mention Russian pilots are getting great practice before the war with NATO.
5
"since many of the anti-Assad groups aligned with the United States fight alongside the Nusra Front and depend on it for support."
Are we helping known terrorists? I am outraged...
Are we helping known terrorists? I am outraged...
38
More from the Russian propaganda machine.
23
do you remember senator john McCain's picture with el Baghdadi, leader of isis on fb?
uncle sam is/was never an innocent bystander.
uncle sam is/was never an innocent bystander.
5
Putin already won Syria and destabilized Ukraine.
The next step is to break EU.
The next step is to break EU.
7
Syrian refugees and the larger group of non refugee immigrants to Europe are taking care of that agenda item, with help from Merkel.
4
Congratulations to Putin. He won a bombed out shell of a country with no infrastructure, no resources, no government, no food, no money, no exports, and no hope for a positive future without massive amounts of help from other countries. And in today's political climate, if Russia doesn't provide the billions or trillions of dollars necessary to turn Syria into a livable country again, who will? With Putin as his ally, Assad has effectively alienated every other government on earth. Let him keep his burning cities. He and Putin can rule the remaining few who are lucky to be alive, but too poor or feeble to leave.
1
@Blue State
But not for how much longer. The gates are starting to close in Europe, and Chancellor Merkel is facing a lot of resistance to her Refugee Policy in Germany.
But not for how much longer. The gates are starting to close in Europe, and Chancellor Merkel is facing a lot of resistance to her Refugee Policy in Germany.
It was the Cheney (a.k.a Bush) Administration that opened a bottle with the evils of war in the Middle East and let them go free and wild. The situation was further aggravated by our enthusiasm with so called Arab Springs that resulted in massive distruction, causualties and milions of refuges. Can someone clearly explain our Middle East policies? I am really scared when I hear Jeb Bush, the presidential candidate, who defends the actions of Cheney and his brother.
Our lack of sound strategic planning created a mess in that region and gave Putin the upper hand. Are we going to learn anything from this?
Our lack of sound strategic planning created a mess in that region and gave Putin the upper hand. Are we going to learn anything from this?
9
There really isn't any need to have questions Russia's game or endgame.
The script is an old one, and straight out of the Cold War/KGB handbook.
Mr. Putin's almost fanatical obsession with turning Russia into a major player on the world political stage has been evident since he assumed control; first as Prime Minister, then as President. And his goal of reincorporating, if not reclaiming former Soviet Republics is hardly disputable -- the main reason why several Eastern European countries are now clamoring for a stronger NATO presence.
With Mr. Putin's entrance into Syria on the side of Bashar al- Assad, he has helped to turn an already difficult situation into the near-impossible one when it comes to negotiating the terms of a lasting cease-fire. Especially with Russia and NATO-member Turkey now on the verge of open conflict.
At this point, the lingering questions shouldn't only be about Russia's endgame, but about everyone else's as well.
The script is an old one, and straight out of the Cold War/KGB handbook.
Mr. Putin's almost fanatical obsession with turning Russia into a major player on the world political stage has been evident since he assumed control; first as Prime Minister, then as President. And his goal of reincorporating, if not reclaiming former Soviet Republics is hardly disputable -- the main reason why several Eastern European countries are now clamoring for a stronger NATO presence.
With Mr. Putin's entrance into Syria on the side of Bashar al- Assad, he has helped to turn an already difficult situation into the near-impossible one when it comes to negotiating the terms of a lasting cease-fire. Especially with Russia and NATO-member Turkey now on the verge of open conflict.
At this point, the lingering questions shouldn't only be about Russia's endgame, but about everyone else's as well.
1
The unspoken question is whether Putin is trying to insulate Russian people from the expectations of European social, economic and political cultural norms or whether Putin is trying to re-establish a new Russian empire via conquest.
Two very different propositions.
It's not likely that Putin believes Russia has the strength to attack, let alone conquer Europe. Russia has ~144m people, ~$70B annual defense spending and a GDP of ~$2T. The combined data for Germany, UK and France are ~200m people, ~$170B annual defense spending and total GDP of ~$10T. The reality is that Europeans can defend themselves if they choose. The fact that Europeans choose not to fund their NATO obligations compromises their ability to defend themselves, but that's really their choice.
No, my bet is that Mr Putin, like oligarchs everywhere, want to insulate their power base from corrupting influences. For the past 100+ years, the corrupting influence of Russian cultural norms has been the quality of life of Europeans and Americans whose oligarchs have settled on representative, capitalist democracies as their economic and political foundations. That has always been the threat to Russian oligarchs whose governance has and never will enable their people to fulfill their capabilities.
The Russian people will need to decide for themselves whether Putin's return of a quasi Soviet Union style of governance suits their expectations. That is the end game scenario for Russia.
Two very different propositions.
It's not likely that Putin believes Russia has the strength to attack, let alone conquer Europe. Russia has ~144m people, ~$70B annual defense spending and a GDP of ~$2T. The combined data for Germany, UK and France are ~200m people, ~$170B annual defense spending and total GDP of ~$10T. The reality is that Europeans can defend themselves if they choose. The fact that Europeans choose not to fund their NATO obligations compromises their ability to defend themselves, but that's really their choice.
No, my bet is that Mr Putin, like oligarchs everywhere, want to insulate their power base from corrupting influences. For the past 100+ years, the corrupting influence of Russian cultural norms has been the quality of life of Europeans and Americans whose oligarchs have settled on representative, capitalist democracies as their economic and political foundations. That has always been the threat to Russian oligarchs whose governance has and never will enable their people to fulfill their capabilities.
The Russian people will need to decide for themselves whether Putin's return of a quasi Soviet Union style of governance suits their expectations. That is the end game scenario for Russia.
3
Putin is shrewd, but I do not think he is guided merely by cynical self-interest. There are signs that he see himself as a genuine patriot. He sees himself as the right man in the right place at the right time, doing whatever is needed to restore Russia to "greatness" after the chaos of the Yeltsin years.
I think beneath the pragmatism, Putin might be a true believer in his own propaganda.
I think beneath the pragmatism, Putin might be a true believer in his own propaganda.
2
In a ranking of countries with proven oil reserves, Syria is 34th in the world, the only Arab country with less is postage stamp-sized Bahrain. While a civil war open to all comers is not to be minimized, anywhere in the Middle-East, Syria as a nation hardly offers a "pivotal role" to anyone, let alone Mr. Putin.
and yet Syrian refugees have provided quite a bit of cover for the rest of the Muslim horde beginning the new caliphate in Europe....
2
Blue State, about 60% of refugees arriving in Europe are male, and a huge chunk of them are from Afghanistan, that's after 15 years of our occupation of that country. If we can do such a great job, why are they fleeing for Europe? Let's do ourselves a favor and stay out of it. Syria was never in our orbit, so let Putin deal with it.
"Yet its ultimate objectives remain murky, not least navigating a graceful exit from the messy conflict."
If Assad wins, Russia does not need a graceful exit.
Russia is not pushed to see this as urgent. It is not spending on this like the US does on its wars. It pays only for about three medium-sized squadrons of planes, and their base security. That just can't possibly break the budget. Much as we tend to think of our expenses as model of their expenses, it just isn't.
The same is true in Ukraine. Putin is not just minimizing the profile of his open involvement, he is minimizing the expense. Russia has no end of old tanks, guns, and ammo, enough for hundreds of divisions left over sealed in plastic factory new in storage from the old Soviet Union. It costs him nothing to hand over a tiny part of that.
The sanctions hurt some Russians, but the enforce the monopolies of Putin and his oligarch friends. THEY are getting richer, and we've always said that was their priority. Don't forget what we always said about them, as if suddenly we think they care for others.
We are kidding ourselves about Putin, inside the Beltway ideologues talking to themselves about what they want to believe, instead of seeing the real world for what it is.
If Assad wins, Russia does not need a graceful exit.
Russia is not pushed to see this as urgent. It is not spending on this like the US does on its wars. It pays only for about three medium-sized squadrons of planes, and their base security. That just can't possibly break the budget. Much as we tend to think of our expenses as model of their expenses, it just isn't.
The same is true in Ukraine. Putin is not just minimizing the profile of his open involvement, he is minimizing the expense. Russia has no end of old tanks, guns, and ammo, enough for hundreds of divisions left over sealed in plastic factory new in storage from the old Soviet Union. It costs him nothing to hand over a tiny part of that.
The sanctions hurt some Russians, but the enforce the monopolies of Putin and his oligarch friends. THEY are getting richer, and we've always said that was their priority. Don't forget what we always said about them, as if suddenly we think they care for others.
We are kidding ourselves about Putin, inside the Beltway ideologues talking to themselves about what they want to believe, instead of seeing the real world for what it is.
20
I'm not sure Putin will be able to resist escalating his involvement in Syria, because I doubt the current agreement will hold in the long-term. However, you are correct in that Putin, unlike many Western politicians, actually seem capable of learning from past mistakes. Soviet Union's deep commitment to Afghanistan helped break that regime, and Putin is playing it smarter.
2
So we have the US, presently with a weak President soon to leave and a weak group of Presidential candidates one of whom is to take over a year from now, we have a weak UK constantly having a fight between England and Scotland while not knowing if they should stick with the EU as some illegitimate cousin or stand on its own feet, and of course we have the EU itself being everybody's collateral damage. If Putin cannot be more powerful than this collection of C- forces he obviously would never have been in charge of Russia - as is, he has been in charge for soon some 20 years now.
25
Putin's advantage is not that he is "strong" (whatever that means.) It is because he is "smart." Our problem is not a weak President. Our problem is an idiotic foreign policy seemingly made by somebody suffering from delusions and multiple personality disorder.
That's because our foreign policy is not driven by true national interest. American foreign policy is driven by the interests of Pentagon generals wanting to showcase their service branch for more funding, of politicians who want to milk a war for electoral advantage, and of defense contractors who are eager for more costly wars to drive up demands for their products.
Obama has to own the problem because he is the President, but he is far from the only one who made the problem.
That's because our foreign policy is not driven by true national interest. American foreign policy is driven by the interests of Pentagon generals wanting to showcase their service branch for more funding, of politicians who want to milk a war for electoral advantage, and of defense contractors who are eager for more costly wars to drive up demands for their products.
Obama has to own the problem because he is the President, but he is far from the only one who made the problem.
35
@Rudolf
Unlike yourself, I tend to view the EU as bringing about part of the collateral damage. It's like a ship with too many countries on-board, no common language to steer by, and still shouting out commands. If the onslaught of refugees and migrants don't sink it altogether, it will be an easy target.
Unlike yourself, I tend to view the EU as bringing about part of the collateral damage. It's like a ship with too many countries on-board, no common language to steer by, and still shouting out commands. If the onslaught of refugees and migrants don't sink it altogether, it will be an easy target.
1
Russian objective is clear. It is to free Constantinople and to open Bosphorus. It has been that way ever since muclim barbarians captured the Bizantean capital and named it Istanbul.... Prepare for war
9
BlueSky, Russia does not have the conventional arms to conquer Turkey, let alone open and occupy the Bosphorus. There are not enough people, money or armaments in Russia to accomplish the task.
Russian nuclear weapons could certainly destroy Constantinople and the Bosphorus, but then Russia would likely be destroyed by NATO nuclear retaliatory strikes and the Turkish region would not be habitable.
Russians are some of the most intellectually gifted people in the world if they'd ever get the chance to apply themselves to develop their economy and society. So long as such oligarchs as Mr Putin rule, that will not happen.
Russian nuclear weapons could certainly destroy Constantinople and the Bosphorus, but then Russia would likely be destroyed by NATO nuclear retaliatory strikes and the Turkish region would not be habitable.
Russians are some of the most intellectually gifted people in the world if they'd ever get the chance to apply themselves to develop their economy and society. So long as such oligarchs as Mr Putin rule, that will not happen.
4
You are clearly misinformed. Not to mention Russia will only provide air cover and specialists. The rest will be done by Kurdish and various other forces.
Also you are the victim of your own propaganda as far as Russian military capability is concerned. But keep believing your own hype. Let us see how far it gets you
Also you are the victim of your own propaganda as far as Russian military capability is concerned. But keep believing your own hype. Let us see how far it gets you
4
Bob, why haven't all those 100s of millions of Sunnis taken on ISIS? Territories controlled by ISIS border Saudi Arabia, why don't they march in and get rid of ISIS?
1
Hard to see how "responsible actions" might include wholesale indiscriminate bombing of women and children.
Putin seems to have forgotten that his great Soviet empire collapsed because it extended itself too far --bombing Afghanistan --and that the this empire had nothing to show for all its show.
Russia doesn't innovate anything. And the idea that a country can bomb a region and there will be no blowback is Delusion of the First Order (our first gulf war begat Al Qaeda begat ISIS . . .)
Putin can prance and strut all he wants. It's an empty show.
Putin seems to have forgotten that his great Soviet empire collapsed because it extended itself too far --bombing Afghanistan --and that the this empire had nothing to show for all its show.
Russia doesn't innovate anything. And the idea that a country can bomb a region and there will be no blowback is Delusion of the First Order (our first gulf war begat Al Qaeda begat ISIS . . .)
Putin can prance and strut all he wants. It's an empty show.
85
Don't underestimate this guy. He's currently testing all the World Alliances, and his economy is in the tank. What would you do next if you were him?
5
Corrections:
1) all Russian planes that are used in those bombings are equipped with SVP-24 (or alternative) aiming systems that calculate exact time of when bomb is dropped fully automatically, depending on GLONASS/GPS data, landscape maps, weather such as wind/humidity/etc, altitude/speed/trajectory of bomber. This dramatically raises accuracy of targeting even if regular bombs are used (though Russia uses six types of guided munitions in Syria, too);
2) the scale of operation would not allow any "indiscriminate" bombings since the front lines in Syria are huge, you need to target actual terrorist gangs to destroy them. If you want an example of actual indiscriminate bombings, look at Vietnam war, where USA dropped several millions (!) of bombs. Russia so far has only used about 28 000 bombs/missiles;
... (to be continued in follow up post)
1) all Russian planes that are used in those bombings are equipped with SVP-24 (or alternative) aiming systems that calculate exact time of when bomb is dropped fully automatically, depending on GLONASS/GPS data, landscape maps, weather such as wind/humidity/etc, altitude/speed/trajectory of bomber. This dramatically raises accuracy of targeting even if regular bombs are used (though Russia uses six types of guided munitions in Syria, too);
2) the scale of operation would not allow any "indiscriminate" bombings since the front lines in Syria are huge, you need to target actual terrorist gangs to destroy them. If you want an example of actual indiscriminate bombings, look at Vietnam war, where USA dropped several millions (!) of bombs. Russia so far has only used about 28 000 bombs/missiles;
... (to be continued in follow up post)
3
... (continued from previous post)
3) claims of "women and children" deaths come from Twitter accounts by Al-Qaeda and their clones (Nusra, Ahrar, etc) that are collected by UK-based, Qatari-funded (one of main sponsors of "regime change" in Syria) "humanitarian" organizations and presented as "research". Of course, it is inevitable that casualties during wars appear, but the numbers that those organizations give are totally random. There is no way to say those military-age men in camouflage (almost never women and children) that terrorists claim are "civilians" died of bombings by Russia or Syria or by USA and coalition (that also bomb Aleppo and Idlib provinces) OR from shelling by competing jihadi gangs;
4) terrorist-held areas of Syria are long mostly deserted as they captured them by use of over 1000 units of so-called "hell cannons". Not many place to live there left. Also, terrorists turn people's children into child soldiers/suicide bombers (boys) and black garbage bags (girls) -- not many people like that, unless they are staunch jihadi supporters themselves;
... (to be continued in follow up post)
3) claims of "women and children" deaths come from Twitter accounts by Al-Qaeda and their clones (Nusra, Ahrar, etc) that are collected by UK-based, Qatari-funded (one of main sponsors of "regime change" in Syria) "humanitarian" organizations and presented as "research". Of course, it is inevitable that casualties during wars appear, but the numbers that those organizations give are totally random. There is no way to say those military-age men in camouflage (almost never women and children) that terrorists claim are "civilians" died of bombings by Russia or Syria or by USA and coalition (that also bomb Aleppo and Idlib provinces) OR from shelling by competing jihadi gangs;
4) terrorist-held areas of Syria are long mostly deserted as they captured them by use of over 1000 units of so-called "hell cannons". Not many place to live there left. Also, terrorists turn people's children into child soldiers/suicide bombers (boys) and black garbage bags (girls) -- not many people like that, unless they are staunch jihadi supporters themselves;
... (to be continued in follow up post)
1
Putin wants a military base on the Crimea, and one on the Mediterranean. He also wants to raise the price of oil, and eliminate any sanctions against his regime in any way possible.
What makes that so hard to figure out?
What makes that so hard to figure out?
15
Price of oil does not depend on Syria at all: it is not major oil country; never was, never will. But Putin knows very well that jihadists target Russia again after they are done in Syria. Russia has already defeated a Caliphate in Chechnya fifteen years ago, and it does not want a repeat. Saudi-imported Wahhabi/Salafist warlords took a beating then, and now are all dead, but still it was quite bloody war.
3
Russia's GDP contracted 3.7 percent in 2015 and will probably get worse in the coming years. Of course Putin wants to raise the price of oil but the days of 100-120 dollars per barrel oil are probably gone. Fracking is very profitable at those price range and still profitable at 90. Fracking activities will make sure that there is a glut of oil
when the price inches up to 90 dollar per barrel.
when the price inches up to 90 dollar per barrel.
1
He's only agreeing to the cease fire because he's got no money. He's not winning at all.
9
First of all, Putin winning, even by USA's accounts. Second of all, Syrian bombings only take about two percent of Russian Defence Military budget. Russia can run it forever without even noticing. Third of all, Russia has stable economy (-1%/ 1% GDP change this year versus previous year), big trade surplus, minimal state debt, rapidly shrinking international corporate debt, $400 billion of reserves in three state funds. Budget deficit for this year is going to be $25 billion. Go figure for how many years Russia can run in such conditions without facing any significant issues.
6
@Max
Putin is "winning" because the U.S. is not actively engaging. We're talking about REAL LIFE here. Not some hyped-up macho war-game. PEOPLE ARE DYING. Doesn't that account for anything?
Nothing about that in your posts.
Putin is "winning" because the U.S. is not actively engaging. We're talking about REAL LIFE here. Not some hyped-up macho war-game. PEOPLE ARE DYING. Doesn't that account for anything?
Nothing about that in your posts.
Bob, with our heavily leveraged oil companies unable to pay their debt, our major banks may explode before Russia.