Little to Nothing
The desire to again obliterate Russia is still very strong in certain U.S. political quarters, despite the fact that it strengthens Moscow's impulse to resist any efforts to coexist with the American superpower. In the case of the Ukraine crisis, however, the anti-Russia stance is fueled by a desire to humiliate for a different reason: Barack Obama can be painted as a weakling. Meanwhile, even ex-vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is quoted as a subject matter expert. She had warned during the 2008 presidential campaign that she could see Russia from her living room and that unless the U.S. showed sufficient toughness, Vladimir Putin would attack Ukraine.
In 2009, Obama entered the scene with the intention that the U.S. and Russia had to push the “reset button.” But the skirmishes in Syria, Libya and Iran followed thick and fast, and Edward Snowden, the traitor who absconded with the NSA's hard drives, found refuge in Moscow. From Obama's perspective, all slaps in the face. Yet Obama never wanted to leave the impression that he didn't think the difficult search for common ground with Russia was worth less than confrontation. During the winter Olympics, the U.S. refrained from swapping insults and cooperated with Moscow on security issues; two U.S. warships anchored off the Sochi coast throughout the games.
Then came the Ukrainian uprising in Maidan, as it was called, and the designated authority for European affairs, Ambassador Victoria Nuland, met with Geoffrey Pyatt, U.S. Ambassador in Kiev. Decades from now, historians may uncover documents that will perhaps reveal how top leaders in the U.S. hoped things would play out after Viktor Yanukovych had been deposed.
Vladimir Putin apparently cares little about U.S. and EU accusations that he is violating international law in Crimea. Meanwhile, Obama's critics within his own party who favor intervention, and Republicans along with the right wing media, all insist Obama must take decisive action. Jimmy Carter's former security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski recommends Obama put selected NATO military units on alert in order to warn Putin — whom Brzezinski describes as “a partially comical imitation of Mussolini and a more menacing reminder of Hitler.” He went on to say the West should assure Ukraine “that the Ukrainian army can count on immediate and direct Western aid so as to enhance its defensive capabilities.” Republican Senator Lindsay Graham opined that he'd like "to create a democratic noose around Putin’s Russia," while the New York Times wondered whether Obama was strong enough to engage a former KGB colonel in hand-to-hand combat.
Obama is torn between the wish for sanctions — something with which Europe would have to agree — and diplomacy that, by definition, requires understanding of the positions held by both sides. John Kerry and Victoria Nuland visited interim premiere Arseniy Yatsenyuk, offering a $1 billion loan guarantee. With such a meager offering, he demonstrated that what the U.S. can actually do doesn't match its rhetoric.
In 2009, Obama entered the scene with the intention that the U.S. and Russia had to push the “reset button.” But the skirmishes in Syria, Libya and Iran followed thick and fast, and Edward Snowden, the traitor who absconded with the NSA's hard drives, found refuge in Moscow. From Obama's perspective, all slaps in the face. Yet Obama never wanted to leave the impression that he didn't think the difficult search for common ground with Russia was worth less than confrontation. During the winter Olympics, the U.S. refrained from swapping insults and cooperated with Moscow on security issues; two U.S. warships anchored off the Sochi coast throughout the games.
Then came the Ukrainian uprising in Maidan, as it was called, and the designated authority for European affairs, Ambassador Victoria Nuland, met with Geoffrey Pyatt, U.S. Ambassador in Kiev. Decades from now, historians may uncover documents that will perhaps reveal how top leaders in the U.S. hoped things would play out after Viktor Yanukovych had been deposed.
Vladimir Putin apparently cares little about U.S. and EU accusations that he is violating international law in Crimea. Meanwhile, Obama's critics within his own party who favor intervention, and Republicans along with the right wing media, all insist Obama must take decisive action. Jimmy Carter's former security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski recommends Obama put selected NATO military units on alert in order to warn Putin — whom Brzezinski describes as “a partially comical imitation of Mussolini and a more menacing reminder of Hitler.” He went on to say the West should assure Ukraine “that the Ukrainian army can count on immediate and direct Western aid so as to enhance its defensive capabilities.” Republican Senator Lindsay Graham opined that he'd like "to create a democratic noose around Putin’s Russia," while the New York Times wondered whether Obama was strong enough to engage a former KGB colonel in hand-to-hand combat.
Obama is torn between the wish for sanctions — something with which Europe would have to agree — and diplomacy that, by definition, requires understanding of the positions held by both sides. John Kerry and Victoria Nuland visited interim premiere Arseniy Yatsenyuk, offering a $1 billion loan guarantee. With such a meager offering, he demonstrated that what the U.S. can actually do doesn't match its rhetoric.