We are turning the Middle East into the “Muddled East” without a “therefore” ready. (7 reader comments)
The 'Muddled East'
Wed., Apr. 12, 2017
By Joe Honick
Read Full Story in Subscriber Area
Category: Public Affairs Commentary
We are turning the Middle East into the “Muddled East” without a “therefore” ready. (7 reader comments)
Read Full Story in Subscriber Area
Category: Public Affairs Commentary
Thanks for so much thoughtful response, Art. It was all sensible. However, it is important to understand in the world I have been working for about 40 years, just how much pride so many nations and their bosses have and want to maintain.
Trump has not helped at all with his boastful excesses, threats to others and, worse, damnable accusations as with accusing China of raping American economy. Putin, for all his evil intent, is a proud man of a country he wants and demands to have equal footing in the world alongside the United States and anyone else. Trump had a chance to cement that relationship without pressing Putin toward so much verbal conflict that could get worse.
You talk about all those injunctions as if we run the world and Russia would have to acquiesce to whatever we impose. They might deserve all those injunctions, but Putin is well aware we are not doing much about the mini-Holocausts also occurring elsewhere in the world where millions are being starved, children being sold into sexual stuff and worse...and those realities include millions, yes millions! And we are not present to do a damned thing in places like Myanmar, Nigeria, Somalia etc.
If Trump wants to be world leader, there is no sense he can push us into war for any reason. The only time we have the slightest right to conduct war is if our nation is quite clearly threatened, the Congress is consulted and we have the wherewithal to move.
Meanwhile, if we are going to challenge another nation, especially a tough one with a damned tough and smart leader like Russia, it would have been wise had Trump possessed the "Therefore" I indicated necessary once he made his brash knee jerk hit on a Syrian airfield so long after knowing Assad had been doing his evil deeds for years. But all Trump could do up to now was blame everything he could think of on Obama and everyone else. Having done not a damned thing in Syria of any significance, of course Putin figured he would not do much now.
Having done what he did, however, Trump must now act like someone who does not want wars and he must engage Putin instead of slinging all those accusations, which seem to be his only approach....name calling I have called "slander instead of candor." Putin cannot afford to blink and won't.
Joe, Of course I don't propose war, although sometime war is necessary. But I do think military action is necessary to save people from the barbarism of their own governments. Not doing so led to WW2 and the Holocaust.
As for Russia, history shows that they only respect another nation that stands up to them. JFK proved that.
You ask what I propose. Here's what I propose: Additional sanctions against Russia, arming our NATO allies with the latest in military equipment and redeploying more U.S. and allied troops to Poland, despite Russia's long history of being paranoid about foreign troops on its borders.
And, yes, I believe Obama's "leading from behind" strategy worsened the situation in Syria and the entire Mid-East.
When the U.S. pulled its missiles out of Poland it certainly didn't result in a kinder, gentler Russia. I thought it was a mistake then and I still do.
Decades of what you call failed diplomacy has not worked with Russia in the Mid-East or Europe. The only diplomacy that seems to work with Russia is what President Truman practiced and was picked up by Reagan and Bush the First -- a strong military.
I propose following the Russia policies of Truman, Reagan, Bush and JFK and adding stronger sanctions until Russia stops protecting governments that kill its own people. That's what I propose And I don't agree with your premise that U.S.'s klutzy diplomacy is the cause for the problems we face today.
It's easy to criticize when an individual is not personally involved in the on-goings; our pundits have proved that for decades. Diplomacy is not easy among friends or enemies.
Bush The Elder created Bashar al Assad by embracing his father as an ally, a move I always thought exceedingly strange, like giving Gaddafi permission to pitch a large tent in New York City during one of his visits.
But of course Trump makes both Bushes look as wise as Solomon, because he believes lobbing missiles is a strategy ("Daddy, do something!"), and, "He's a bad dude" is a foreign policy.
Will this rank amateur lead us into war before he's impeached? Only time will tell.
Art no doubt is correct about trusting the Russians. Trust is not the key word. The international reality in diplomacy is leverage. In place of trust or leverage, what does Art propose? The alternative is either war or some version of that, and we would not have the national will or support for such a self-defeating idea.
We certainly are not going to take on Russia in a conflict no one could possibly win. That being reality, we should have been operating in back room negotiations at a time when we, and certainly Trump, had some modest means to talk with the Russians. Further reality is that we would not tolerate a direct "hit" from the Russians either.
So, Art, our biggest weakness at the moment and has been for some years is klutzy diplomacy that has turned the Middle East into the Muddled East to which I referred.
Our challenge this very moment is for someone to take Trump aside and tell him to stop with the ego stuff and listen to some diplomatic pros who can find ways to turn down the Trump rhetoric that could lead us to were no one wants to go.
As to who avoids open conversation in Russia, you would be surprised where it happens right here as well.
Before any landslide to correct me, I will do a Spicer "walk back" to note it was Clinton who was in the wings on the Oslo accords between Israel and the Palestinians, the plan that quickly collapsed.
No changes to the basic thesis, however, of how we have done a klutzy job in the Muddled Middle East.
My feeling about Russia is that they have never been a trustworthy friend of democratic countries, they have always wanted to be an expansion-minded country and during our lifetime, since World War 2, their actions in Eastern Europe, Cuba and the Mid-East, and during the recent U.S. election, shows that what Russia says is not what they do.
Russia's history prior to World War 2, where Stalin killed thousands of people he disagreed with, can be likened to Putin's one-by-one actions of killing political opponents.
When I was in Russia not too long ago and conversing with Russian citizens, the moment another Russian approached us the person I was speaking to would change the subject of the conversation from world affairs to non-political subjects.
Prior, when I was conversing with three Russian journalists in Asia they joked, "Since communism is gone we are free to speak our minds. But let's go where no one can hear us."
I don't think any agreement with Russia about Assad could be trusted.
Apr. 13, 2017, by Arthur Solomon
Joe, history shows that the only way to respond to a totalitarian leader is not to cave in. That's why I support a tough response to Putin, no matter how proud he may be. Obama should have done it as soon as Russia got involved with Syria. Now the mess is worse.
History also shows that standing tough with despots results in peace; giving in eventually results in war. Yes, Trump might make things worse. But then again he might not. Putin, over the last several years, has shown that he has an expansive policy. That's why I feel like i do.