US Congress Played into Afghan Taliban’s Hands
Published in KM
(Russia) on 20 July 2012
by Viktor Martynyuk (link to original)
The Pentagon is now forbidden to buy Russian Mi-17 helicopters that the Pentagon needs like air.
The saying about making the world’s stupidest mistakes with a smart facial expression is true. Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia must have been extremely serious when he presented his amendment to the draft of the U.S. defense budget for 2013, which bars the Pentagon from working with Rosoboronexport, to his colleagues in the House of Representatives.
One can imagine how the highest ranks of the Pentagon (aloud and silently) cursed Moran as soon as the amendment passed. Breaking a contract for a batch of 10 high-class Mi-17 helicopters, for which there’s simply no alternative in Afghanistan, is no joke! It’s a good thing that the previous contract for 21 helicopters had already been signed. And most offensively to the war hawks, Russia in effect did not lose much from this decision. It just left a bitter aftertaste. Yes, the Russian Defense Ministry has already started talking (albeit without details) about retaliatory sanctions. But at best, the most that this demarche merits is laughter and a sarcastic “so stu-u-u-pid!” a la Zadornov.
The reason for this unexpected decision (especially for the U.S. administration itself) is easy to guess. It’s Russia and China’s veto on the UN Security Council resolution on Syria. Yes, this was certainly a ringing slap in the face to Washington's official self-esteem, but why would Washington punish itself for this? Who knows? Excuse me, Congressman Moran, but why would you do that to Old Man Obama and Iron Hillary? Why would you do that to the American mission in Afghanistan? Ultimately, where is your patriotism?
Yes, when it comes to patriotism, there’s really a catch. Mr. Moran is much too unpragmatic. The Congressman told his colleagues, “I should think it's troubling to all of us that we are purchasing helicopters from a Russian firm that is directly complicit in the deaths of thousands of innocent Syrian men, women and children.” But isn’t this cutting off the nose to spite the face? It’s kind of awkward to write about the fact that Rosoboronexport cannot be blamed "in the deaths of thousands." But it brings to mind a pertinent analogy: Knife makers are not responsible if someone uses their knives to stab someone in an alley. Well, Rosoboronexport’s line of work is arms and military equipment sales. So by definition, its products are made not to be used in parades or to be filmed in movies. However, Congressman Jim Moran might have his own point of view. Certainly, it must be very original; after all, we’ve already established the unique logic of this congressman.
All that’s left is for us is to cross our fingers and pray that our promised reprisal (if our government does in fact deem one necessary) won’t make even this funny congressman laugh.
KM.RU’s columnist discussed the decision of the U.S. Congress with Igor Korotchenko, the editor-in-chief of the Natsionalnaya Oborona (National Defense) magazine, the Chairman of the Russian Defense Ministry's Public Council and a Reservist Colonel:
IK: These demarches were political in nature and, of course, affect US-Russian relations in a broader context, especially since we are talking about cooperation on Afghanistan. After all, it’s primarily in Washington’s interests for the situation there to develop in a stable, predictable and sensible manner. The fact that Americans are beginning to undo with their own hands all the efforts that have been built over cooperation on Afghanistan between the two countries in previous years is very sad, and it certainly will not remain without Moscow’s response. A different question is what form the response will take, and how big it will be.
In general, I can say that the loss of Rosoboronexport’s contract (the delivery of 10 Mi-17 helicopters) is insignificant. It is unpleasant for Russia primarily in political terms, as opposed to economic terms. ... Obviously, we will look for other buyers, since Mi-17 helicopters are commodities that are in demand on the world market. In fact, they are a brand much like the Kalashnikov rifle is among small weapons. The Mi-17 is the same brand, the standard of reliability in the helicopter niche. Let some other customer instead of the Americans buy these helicopters now. We will not incur any direct economic losses.
KM.RU: This decision was clearly caused by emotions after Russia vetoed a resolution on Syria in the Security Council together with China. Does this mean that Congress may yet cool off, come to its senses and lift the ban?
IK: In this case, I can say that there is clearly a conflict of interest between the Pentagon and Congress. After all, the U.S. Defense Department was the main lobbyist for this deal. This was not because of any particular love for Russia, but simply because there is simply no alternative for Russian helicopters in Afghanistan. With regard to a possible reconsideration, we hope that this will happen, of course, but the overall context of U.S.-Russian relations today is not very conducive to this.
The notorious "reset" is failing miserably. The Americans defend predominantly their own national security, there is no progress in negotiations on the European missile defense, and Russia and the U.S. have diametrically opposite positions on Syria. This unfavorable backdrop to their bilateral relations will obviously stay the same in the near future.
The saying about making the world’s stupidest mistakes with a smart facial expression is true. Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia must have been extremely serious when he presented his amendment to the draft of the U.S. defense budget for 2013, which bars the Pentagon from working with Rosoboronexport, to his colleagues in the House of Representatives.
One can imagine how the highest ranks of the Pentagon (aloud and silently) cursed Moran as soon as the amendment passed. Breaking a contract for a batch of 10 high-class Mi-17 helicopters, for which there’s simply no alternative in Afghanistan, is no joke! It’s a good thing that the previous contract for 21 helicopters had already been signed. And most offensively to the war hawks, Russia in effect did not lose much from this decision. It just left a bitter aftertaste. Yes, the Russian Defense Ministry has already started talking (albeit without details) about retaliatory sanctions. But at best, the most that this demarche merits is laughter and a sarcastic “so stu-u-u-pid!” a la Zadornov.
The reason for this unexpected decision (especially for the U.S. administration itself) is easy to guess. It’s Russia and China’s veto on the UN Security Council resolution on Syria. Yes, this was certainly a ringing slap in the face to Washington's official self-esteem, but why would Washington punish itself for this? Who knows? Excuse me, Congressman Moran, but why would you do that to Old Man Obama and Iron Hillary? Why would you do that to the American mission in Afghanistan? Ultimately, where is your patriotism?
Yes, when it comes to patriotism, there’s really a catch. Mr. Moran is much too unpragmatic. The Congressman told his colleagues, “I should think it's troubling to all of us that we are purchasing helicopters from a Russian firm that is directly complicit in the deaths of thousands of innocent Syrian men, women and children.” But isn’t this cutting off the nose to spite the face? It’s kind of awkward to write about the fact that Rosoboronexport cannot be blamed "in the deaths of thousands." But it brings to mind a pertinent analogy: Knife makers are not responsible if someone uses their knives to stab someone in an alley. Well, Rosoboronexport’s line of work is arms and military equipment sales. So by definition, its products are made not to be used in parades or to be filmed in movies. However, Congressman Jim Moran might have his own point of view. Certainly, it must be very original; after all, we’ve already established the unique logic of this congressman.
All that’s left is for us is to cross our fingers and pray that our promised reprisal (if our government does in fact deem one necessary) won’t make even this funny congressman laugh.
KM.RU’s columnist discussed the decision of the U.S. Congress with Igor Korotchenko, the editor-in-chief of the Natsionalnaya Oborona (National Defense) magazine, the Chairman of the Russian Defense Ministry's Public Council and a Reservist Colonel:
IK: These demarches were political in nature and, of course, affect US-Russian relations in a broader context, especially since we are talking about cooperation on Afghanistan. After all, it’s primarily in Washington’s interests for the situation there to develop in a stable, predictable and sensible manner. The fact that Americans are beginning to undo with their own hands all the efforts that have been built over cooperation on Afghanistan between the two countries in previous years is very sad, and it certainly will not remain without Moscow’s response. A different question is what form the response will take, and how big it will be.
In general, I can say that the loss of Rosoboronexport’s contract (the delivery of 10 Mi-17 helicopters) is insignificant. It is unpleasant for Russia primarily in political terms, as opposed to economic terms. ... Obviously, we will look for other buyers, since Mi-17 helicopters are commodities that are in demand on the world market. In fact, they are a brand much like the Kalashnikov rifle is among small weapons. The Mi-17 is the same brand, the standard of reliability in the helicopter niche. Let some other customer instead of the Americans buy these helicopters now. We will not incur any direct economic losses.
KM.RU: This decision was clearly caused by emotions after Russia vetoed a resolution on Syria in the Security Council together with China. Does this mean that Congress may yet cool off, come to its senses and lift the ban?
IK: In this case, I can say that there is clearly a conflict of interest between the Pentagon and Congress. After all, the U.S. Defense Department was the main lobbyist for this deal. This was not because of any particular love for Russia, but simply because there is simply no alternative for Russian helicopters in Afghanistan. With regard to a possible reconsideration, we hope that this will happen, of course, but the overall context of U.S.-Russian relations today is not very conducive to this.
The notorious "reset" is failing miserably. The Americans defend predominantly their own national security, there is no progress in negotiations on the European missile defense, and Russia and the U.S. have diametrically opposite positions on Syria. This unfavorable backdrop to their bilateral relations will obviously stay the same in the near future.
Previous article![]( "Russia Is Saving the World in Syria")
Next article![]( "Cautious in the Face of an International Food Crisis")
