Why the US Does Not Respond to Russia’s Challenge
The fact that the U.S. is hiding from threats is indicative of a country that is confident neither in its own capabilities nor in its righteousness.
Regarding the resolution recently adopted by the U.S. Congress, which urged Obama to quickly render military assistance to Ukraine, two thoughts came to mind. First, Congress has begun to clearly and accurately formulate issues, which serves America’s national interests. As we know, this was not Congress’s first resolution supporting Ukraine.
Secondly, the Obama administration has unfortunately not demonstrated the same level of decisiveness thus far, insofar as its actions have been driven not by considerations of global security, but by simple isolationism.
The isolationist phase will shortly end, but I have doubts over whether the current American president has sufficient decisiveness to change his position.
Unfortunately, this pacifist view towards international security has won out thus far in the Obama administration. The United States has not refrained from supporting Ukraine, and for this we are grateful, it goes without saying. But I would not begin to expect a speedy decision on the question of military assistance, at least until the moment that Russia takes some actions that destabilize the entire front and pose a real threat not only to Ukraine, but the entire civilized world.
This is precisely the opinion that Obama holds regarding America’s place and role in the world. The reason for this opinion – whether it is fear or reluctance to interfere in external conflicts – is a separate question. But the situation must be analyzed based on existing reality. Of course, this pacifist approach does not correspond to the role that the U.S. occupies in the world, and furthermore, it provokes dictatorial regimes such as Russia’s toward more brazen and aggressive actions.
Hiding from threats and failing to respond to aggressors’ challenges is not the position of a strong state, but rather the position of a country which is confident neither in its own capabilities nor in its righteousness. When the U.S. displays indecisiveness, it unavoidably influences the general global situation. Isolationism is an extremely flawed approach, but there is nothing to be done over the fact that the administration has chosen this approach. One can only hope that future events force Obama to act, since Congressional resolutions are obviously insufficient to convince the American president to help Ukraine defend itself from Russian aggression.
Regarding the resolution recently adopted by the U.S. Congress, which urged Obama to quickly render military assistance to Ukraine, two thoughts came to mind. First, Congress has begun to clearly and accurately formulate issues, which serves America’s national interests. As we know, this was not Congress’s first resolution supporting Ukraine.
Secondly, the Obama administration has unfortunately not demonstrated the same level of decisiveness thus far, insofar as its actions have been driven not by considerations of global security, but by simple isolationism.
The isolationist phase will shortly end, but I have doubts over whether the current American president has sufficient decisiveness to change his position.
Unfortunately, this pacifist view towards international security has won out thus far in the Obama administration. The United States has not refrained from supporting Ukraine, and for this we are grateful, it goes without saying. But I would not begin to expect a speedy decision on the question of military assistance, at least until the moment that Russia takes some actions that destabilize the entire front and pose a real threat not only to Ukraine, but the entire civilized world.
This is precisely the opinion that Obama holds regarding America’s place and role in the world. The reason for this opinion – whether it is fear or reluctance to interfere in external conflicts – is a separate question. But the situation must be analyzed based on existing reality. Of course, this pacifist approach does not correspond to the role that the U.S. occupies in the world, and furthermore, it provokes dictatorial regimes such as Russia’s toward more brazen and aggressive actions.
Hiding from threats and failing to respond to aggressors’ challenges is not the position of a strong state, but rather the position of a country which is confident neither in its own capabilities nor in its righteousness. When the U.S. displays indecisiveness, it unavoidably influences the general global situation. Isolationism is an extremely flawed approach, but there is nothing to be done over the fact that the administration has chosen this approach. One can only hope that future events force Obama to act, since Congressional resolutions are obviously insufficient to convince the American president to help Ukraine defend itself from Russian aggression.