Sunday, September 7, 2008

McBamma's foreign policy on Russia


This posting was written after grappling with many of my friends and family on the difference between a McCain or Obama foreign policy. We all know where the Democrats stand on Russia. As for the Republicans it gets confusing. Ideologically, Putin and Medvedev are closer to the Republicans. However, Putin for the last eight years seemed to be embracing free market principles taken out of the playbook of Reagan while his counterpart George W. Bush seems to be using Lenin's playbook. Now where would a McCain presidency stand?

When the Russians pulled their forces out of Europe after the fall of the Berlin wall, they were in a state of Euphoria. The Russians no longer had to worry about security anymore based on the US promises they would likewise not move NATO closer to Russia's borders. It was in agreement that marked the end of the Cold War. However, the Clinton Admin reneged and decided to move NATO closer to Russia's borders despite promises. The US sensed the Russians during the Yeltsin days were too weak to do anything. To add insult to injury, the US decided first to use NATO forces to strike against the Serbs in Bosnia and later in 1999, against Russia's wishes to bomb Serbia and take Kosovo-Metohija from the Serbs.

I remember when Bush W. debated with Gore in 2000 on this issue. Gore must have really thought he had Bush check mated during the debates on this subject. If you were watching the debates you just knew he was thinking that Bush would sound silly trying to debate the "Gore the Expert." However, when Gore asked Bush W. what he would do in regards to Kosovo, Bush properly replied (convincing enough to earn my support) that this is Russia's sphere of influence not ours. I was over joyed to hear Bush answer this since this would mark a 180 degree turn from the Clinton years. However, was I ever wrong on this one! As we know now, Bush W. even recognized the independence of Kosovo despite Serbia's friendship to Bush and against Russia's wishes. I spent many meetings in the White House with the official delegations from the Serbian Orthodox Church to no avail on this subject.

What happened with Bush's change of heart? Going back to 2000, Bush and Putin embarked on a good friendship. Back in 2000, Putin correctly warned Bush that the greatest threat to security for both countries was the terrorist threats from the Middle East. He even proposed a new security agreement that would make Russia and the US the leaders in the war against terrorism. However, Rumsfeld and others laughed at this and continued to push NATO expansion (like Clinton) and to leave the earlier agreements in place that Reagan implemented with Gorbachev. At this time, they still did not take Osama Bin Laden serious. Then came September 11. Putin was right. This was the bigger threat, but the Bush Admin failed to address it earlier. I was puzzled about this since when I was an officer in the US Army, we were quite aware of where the presence of Islamic terrorists in Bosnia but did nothing to interfere with them. Serbs warned us on numerous occasions that Al Qaida would attack us eventually while our people would laugh at them thinking the Islamic extremists were no threat. They were wrong on that! After 9-11, the Russians reminded the US about this and even came to help the US by securing the border of Afghanistan with Russian troops stationed in the "stans" of Central Asia. Even today logistics for US troops are supported by Russia in Central Asia. But for some reason, Bush W. decided to embark on the same play book created by Bill Clinton. He moved NATO even closer to Russia's borders and more recently Bush recognized the illegal independence of Kosovo, an integral territory within Serbia. This was a blow to Russia. Russia was under great pressure to recognize Abkhazia and Ossetia despite but chose not to, even though it would be a popular decision to do so in Russia. Russia stuck to the principle of no border changes making Kosovo a stand on this principle. However, when Georgia which was armed by the U.S., attacked Ossetia and began killing Russian peace keepers, Russia had to change the playing field.

Unfortunately, Senator McCain is also using the same play book and is connected to the government of Georgia through lobbying. Like the pro-Georgian Vice President Cheney on this issue, McCain is wrong - dead wrong . Not only is he wrong, he is supporting the same policies of Bill Clinton which policies will not achieve anything for the United States anyway. The U.S. should not support loose cannon countries and even more so, should not allow these countries to join NATO. Just imagine if a year ago, Cheney got his way and Georgia was allowed to join NATO. That would mean the U.S. would have to provide a defense guarantee to Georgia and be forced to either launch a war to defend Georgia against Russia or risk the collapse of NATO! Is Georgia worth a war against Russia? I think not. The mistake that led to this debacle was the Bush Administration which was following the Clinton Administration's policies by recognizing Kosovo. This caused severe damage to the world order and will impact negatively for decades to come.

Unfortunately Barak Obama is no better. I also cannot help to remember some of my old history lessons about how the Russian Empire fell to communism. The Bolsheviks also supported the Georgians and Ukrainians against Russia! History is repeating itself, only the power base of the Bolsheviks is located on the other side of the ocean. This is insane.

Wednesday, September 3, 2008

First Ossetia/Abkhazia, is Crimea next?


I love Ukraine. It is like my second homeland. I studied in Ukraine, got married in Ukraine, and have invested in Ukraine. Sometimes however, I wonder if there are two or even three Ukraines. It is not unusual with all the confusion and instability with the Ukrainian government that you can find yourself among friends or family having dinner and drinking Ukrainian horilka (vodka) and find yourself taking one of two or even the third side to political arguments.

After the recent war in the south Caucuses where Russia crushed the US backed Georgian army, I again was caught between the differing views in in Ukraine. My friend Andrey who is from Crimea said his fellow Crimeans were next. He warned that Russia is passing out passports and will soon use the same argument as an excuse to invade and conquer Ukraine. I then mentioned that many if not the majority of Crimean citizens claim they are ethnic Russian and mostly speak Russian so what is the big deal?

He replied with an analogy: "What if the U.S. decided to hand out passports to some Canadians just because they look and speak like Americans."

After thinking about this I could not help but tell him that if some Americans in Washington had their way, Canada may become part of the United States. One might ask, how can this be?

It is the so called North America Treaty or proposed Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. The proposal would diminish much of Canadian sovereignty if it was ever implemented. It would definitely make Canada less sovereign than Ukraine should Russia make a move on its fellow Slavic neighbor. So I told my friend that if he wishes to use the US-Canadian analogy in regards to Ukraine, then he should keep in mind that Canada and the US have very close military cooperation in addition to sharing membership in NATO. Because they are predominately English speaking, and they are closer to each other than US is with Mexico. It is only natural relationship and therefore would be also natural for Russia and Ukraine to have close ties on many spheres as well.

So I instead decided to counter with a better analogy: "Now imagine if Canada opted to join the Shanghai Group with Russia. And now lets say that Russian military forces were allowed to enter into Canadian airspace with Russian jet fighterpatrolling the skies along the US-Canadian border. Then lets imagine they deploy missile sites and bases," I replied. We all know this would sound alarm bells in Washington. If Ukraine wasn't striving to join NATO, a military alliance that attacked the sovereignty of Serbia, and which has become increasingly belligerent towards Russia, I don't think the Crimea issue would even be relevant....