In order to understand Obama’s treatment of Russian politics concerning the conflict in Ukraine, all we need to do is ask ourselves how John McCain would have done it differently.
Although a firm believer in diplomacy, the American president has no option other than to increase U.S. sanctions against the Kremlin following the annexation of Crimea and the destabilization of eastern Ukraine. He convinced Europe to impose even stricter sanctions against Moscow. Yet, such measures weren’t enough to stop Vladimir Putin from openly disregarding the Minsk peace agreement, and so Washington is faced with increasing pressure to take a harder line.
Should we provide Kiev forces with defensive weaponry? If we’re looking for equal treatment, then the answer is yes. Pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine have acquired heavy weapons and military equipment from Russia, despite government denials. If we were to do the same with the Ukrainian army, this could mean giving them a chance to actually defend the sovereignty of their country. It could also mean putting a stop to Putin himself, who, it is feared, may undermine the very foundations of Europe. Does such a strategy have a chance at success? It’s hard to say.
If Barack Obama seems hesitant, it’s simply because he doesn’t like war, nor does he like having to take a back seat. That is, rely on drones and air strikes, as was the case in Iraq. He has other priorities to be dealing with. In Syria, he was confronted with a similar situation: should he arm the so-called moderate rebel forces? Today, nobody can claim to have a definitive answer to this question.
If he were to opt for aggressive military reinforcement, he would be running the risk of dividing the united American-European front against Russian dictator Putin.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, advisor to former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, admits that U.S.-Russian relations could potentially turn frosty. But he remains optimistic. The Russian middle class, he predicts, will be the ones to unite western Russia, those who have no interest in a U.S.-Russian conflict, and who value former president Dmitry Medvedev’s sense of internationalism.
Secretary Rubio’s ‘diplomatic masterstroke’ in Delhi unintentionally transformed political damage control into an involuntary roast of his own boss.
The challenge for Washington is no longer whether it possesses sufficient capabilities, but whether the political system can align those capabilities behind a coherent long-term priority.
History has never witnessed a leader quite like Donald Trump — a mix of ignorance, arrogance immorality, brazenness, insensitivity and sheer stupidity.
History has never witnessed a leader quite like Donald Trump — a mix of ignorance, arrogance immorality, brazenness, insensitivity and sheer stupidity.
The challenge for Washington is no longer whether it possesses sufficient capabilities, but whether the political system can align those capabilities behind a coherent long-term priority.
The Beijing summit did not produce a major agreement between the great powers on the region, but it firmly established that Middle Eastern crises are now deeply tied to the great-power dialogue.
History has never witnessed a leader quite like Donald Trump — a mix of ignorance, arrogance immorality, brazenness, insensitivity and sheer stupidity.
A summit that would normally send a reassuring message ... faces total uncertainty thanks to the weakness of the United States. The only person to blame for this is Trump.