OPD: 19 July 14 Edited by Laurence Bouvard
Time for Outrage
The case is closed. For whom? Barack Obama. In his mind, there is no doubt, absolutely none, that Vladimir Putin is the chief architect of the rising violence in Ukraine, and is thus responsible for the downed plane. What about Europeans? For now, they are behaving as they usually do—keeping a low profile.
It is little exaggeration to say that the American president made a frontal attack on Vladimir Putin at his press conference yesterday. For proof, just listen to Obama: “We don’t have time for propaganda, we don’t have time for games.” Because what happened in the Ukrainian sky was “not an accident…[It] is happening because of Russian support.” The acceleration and the geographic expansion of violence “is in large part because of Russian support.” If Putin really wanted to put an end to all the brutality, he could have stopped the flow of weapons and troops to the border between Ukraine and Russia.
So that no doubt remains in the minds of those watching the White House that the world is indeed immersed in a new type of Cold War, the American Ambassador to the U.N., Samantha Power, has echoed her boss’s words. After stating that the missile, according to its Russian designation, was an SA-11, she argued that “we cannot rule out technical assistance from Russia to operate it.”
We see, or rather hear, the U.S. having an open, firm reaction to these events. It is likely that this is attributable, at least in part, to the highly offensive stance that Putin has taken in the Kremlin. But what now? According to Putin, the plane crashed in Ukraine, so the Ukrainian army is responsible. Especially since, according to him, it is the Kiev government which established the conditions that transformed a skirmish into a major crisis. Okay.
Since the guardian of Russia’s ambitions and recurring imperial dreams has mentioned conditions, let’s take a look at those relating to the tragedy that has claimed the lives of nearly 300 civilians. On July 16, the day before the missile was fired, Russia announced the closure of four air routes over its border with Ukraine, including the one the Malaysian Airlines plane took over Ukrainian territory. Eleven days prior to the crash, that plane had taken a trip south of the conflict zone. On July 16, the International Civil Aviation Organization warned its 191 country members that the airspace under the control of the two nations, Ukraine and Russia, posed a real danger. We will ignore other non-variable facts to better focus on the irresponsible, even criminal, attitude of the European authorities.
Noticeably different from U.S. officials, Europeans have not banned the airspace of an area the world knows is at war—an area frequented daily by 300 civilian aircraft. The European administration has suggested that planes avoid eastern Ukraine. But that’s it. If British Airways, Air France-KLM and others have taken different routes, three-quarters of companies have decided to keep things the same for monetary reasons. Meanwhile, U.S. officials have had a ban in place extending to the entire Black Sea since Putin’s annexation of Crimea. In short, we repeat, those in charge of European air safety were irresponsible. Especially since, on June 29, pro-Russian rebels bragged on social media that they had acquired Russian-made missile batteries that were the property of Ukraine.
With respect to sanctions, here too, the Europeans have been weak. It is true that American business with Russia accounts for a small percentage of its economy, so it is obviously easier for the White House to impose sanctions. In contrast, in Europe, trade relations, particularly in Germany, are much stronger, so imposing financial punishment on Russia is less … how shall we say it? Less easy.
However, the attitude adopted by European leaders is clearly dictated by the need for goodwill. Before their summit on Wednesday, they had promised, sworn even, to stand up to Putin. The result? They did not deliver what they had promised. Think, in particular, of Angela Merkel, who has opted for … shyness! Ukraine is burning? Merkel and others are keeping their heads down.
It is little exaggeration to say that the American president made a frontal attack on Vladimir Putin at his press conference yesterday. For proof, just listen to Obama: “We don’t have time for propaganda, we don’t have time for games.” Because what happened in the Ukrainian sky was “not an accident…[It] is happening because of Russian support.” The acceleration and the geographic expansion of violence “is in large part because of Russian support.” If Putin really wanted to put an end to all the brutality, he could have stopped the flow of weapons and troops to the border between Ukraine and Russia.
So that no doubt remains in the minds of those watching the White House that the world is indeed immersed in a new type of Cold War, the American Ambassador to the U.N., Samantha Power, has echoed her boss’s words. After stating that the missile, according to its Russian designation, was an SA-11, she argued that “we cannot rule out technical assistance from Russia to operate it.”
We see, or rather hear, the U.S. having an open, firm reaction to these events. It is likely that this is attributable, at least in part, to the highly offensive stance that Putin has taken in the Kremlin. But what now? According to Putin, the plane crashed in Ukraine, so the Ukrainian army is responsible. Especially since, according to him, it is the Kiev government which established the conditions that transformed a skirmish into a major crisis. Okay.
Since the guardian of Russia’s ambitions and recurring imperial dreams has mentioned conditions, let’s take a look at those relating to the tragedy that has claimed the lives of nearly 300 civilians. On July 16, the day before the missile was fired, Russia announced the closure of four air routes over its border with Ukraine, including the one the Malaysian Airlines plane took over Ukrainian territory. Eleven days prior to the crash, that plane had taken a trip south of the conflict zone. On July 16, the International Civil Aviation Organization warned its 191 country members that the airspace under the control of the two nations, Ukraine and Russia, posed a real danger. We will ignore other non-variable facts to better focus on the irresponsible, even criminal, attitude of the European authorities.
Noticeably different from U.S. officials, Europeans have not banned the airspace of an area the world knows is at war—an area frequented daily by 300 civilian aircraft. The European administration has suggested that planes avoid eastern Ukraine. But that’s it. If British Airways, Air France-KLM and others have taken different routes, three-quarters of companies have decided to keep things the same for monetary reasons. Meanwhile, U.S. officials have had a ban in place extending to the entire Black Sea since Putin’s annexation of Crimea. In short, we repeat, those in charge of European air safety were irresponsible. Especially since, on June 29, pro-Russian rebels bragged on social media that they had acquired Russian-made missile batteries that were the property of Ukraine.
With respect to sanctions, here too, the Europeans have been weak. It is true that American business with Russia accounts for a small percentage of its economy, so it is obviously easier for the White House to impose sanctions. In contrast, in Europe, trade relations, particularly in Germany, are much stronger, so imposing financial punishment on Russia is less … how shall we say it? Less easy.
However, the attitude adopted by European leaders is clearly dictated by the need for goodwill. Before their summit on Wednesday, they had promised, sworn even, to stand up to Putin. The result? They did not deliver what they had promised. Think, in particular, of Angela Merkel, who has opted for … shyness! Ukraine is burning? Merkel and others are keeping their heads down.
Previous article![]( "Agony of a Great Empire")
