Putin's war, not Obama's

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Good read.

By Marc Ambinder March 1, 2014 2:12 PM The Week

There's a fallacy afoot in the efforts to blame President Obama for the crisis in the Ukraine. It goes like this: because American's hand on the global tiller is unsteady and President Obama failed to enforce his "red line" in Syria, Russian President Vladimir Putin feels empowered to threaten and perhaps make war with the Ukraine because he does not fear repercussions. Moreover, by letting Russia invent the solution to Syria's transgression, Putin has earned some political capital that he feels he can spend. There's a veneer of plausibility on these allegations. The President's refusal to endorse some type of kinetic, military punishment against Bashir Assad stands as a moral failure to many, and could conceivably have furhter opened the aperture for murderous misbehavior by other tyrants. And Russia enjoyed its (rare) moment in the sun as the international peace-broker.

But the "if we had only done this" school of foreign policy can easily hang itself by its own noose. The reason why President Obama did not intervene in Syria have more to do with domestic and international norms collected after the disaster of the Iraq War. For the sake of argument, it is more plausible to assume that Americans would be less opposed to military action in Middle Eastern counties if the torment of Iraq were not on their minds. Also plausible: had the military not learned about modern Middle Eastern adventurism and had generals not developed their own (probably correct) biases against one-off "signaling" military strikes outside the realm of counter-terrorism, Obama's military advisers might well have forecast different outcomes had he decided to punish Assad by, say, airstrikes against the command and control structure, or by a bigger commitment to Syrian rebels.

One undeniable truth: Iraq weakened the U.S. more than anything done since. Maybe Obama overlearned its lessons; maybe we all have. But nothing empowered Vladimir Putin more than America's squandering of moral standing in the early part of this century.

I also find the Ukraine and Syria to be different genotypically and phenotypically. Syria was never part of the Soviet empire. The Ukraine was a critical part of it. There is no equivalent Crimean problem in Syria; the duly, if unappealingly elected President of the Ukraine, has asked for Russia's help here. (Yes, we might think that Viktor Yanukovych's election was not legitimate, but that is not a very solid principle upon which to base a recognition of legitimacy; if it were, America really should never attend U.N. generally assemblies and ought to withdraw from half of the treaties it has negotiated.) Crimea has also directly appealed for Russia's military assistance.

None of this is to say that Putin faces a clear path forward. Any post-Sochi halo will disappear the moment Russian troops kill innocent Ukrainians. The West will regroup against Russia for the duration of the conflict. Putin's domestic political standing is at stake, too. War would be disastrous, but Russians don't want to lose the Ukraine to the West, and they are particularly protective of ethnic Russians in the Crimea. What I don't know, in other words, is whether the United States's protests would have mattered any more to Putin if Obama had somehow used the U.S. military to punish Syria.

View this article on TheWeek.com

Edited March 3, 2014 by Porterhouse

[Sousuke 1,214]

Where is the Ottoman Empire, France, & Britain when you need them. They are the only ones cable of protecting Crimea.

[Crashed~N2~Me 970]

& just think - Some1 actually paid for this gleaning.

I suppose the 1st sentence = sold! To the low information voter wearing the Blue T-Shirt with an image of our Paper Tiger POTUS waving a scolding finger at Putin & Putin extending a finger back!

I clicked on the link to see if there was more...nope...that's it. Am I surprised? (rolling my eyes) Next!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

[Crashed~N2~Me 970]

Not something to look at first thing in the morning. You are brave.

[lostinblue 1,989]

[LibCampFireClub 635]

There's a fallacy afoot in the efforts to blame President Obama for the crisis in the Ukraine.

I'm with you on that. He can't be blamed for this because after all, he didn't learn about it until he heard it on the news.

[Karee 4,190]

I'm with you on that. He can't be blamed for this because after all, he didn't learn about it until he heard it on the news.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

despite the fact of a video and text excerpt clearly showing what she said, some la la land liberals still can't deal with the truth.

and oddly enough they talk about facts. Oh well I guess they have meds for that

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Please stay on topic.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

Please stay on topic.

I thought the topic was how it's not possible to blame obama. Correct?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Please stay on topic.

You're talking to the wrong crowd. This war is Obama's fault, no matter what evidence you find to the contrary. Remember, 9/11 was due to Obama-like decisions, as one member stated.

[deleted-05292014 331]

Blaming our president for Putins actions are idiotic at best and just demonstrates once again Republican weakness when it comes to understanding foreign policy. If your best card is a Sarah Palin, not only do you not deserve to ever be in the White House again but also having no part ever in making decisions on the geo political landscape.

Militarily I don't think we have a play in the Ukraine. Really doesn't matter who is in the White House. Syria is also very complicated. We don't exactly know who these rebel groups are, and a couple of them have ties to Al Quada so why would we want to repeat Ronnie Reagans mistake and arm our enemies.

We already spent our load fighting in the longest war in our nations history, Afghanistan & Iraq. The difference now and the cold war is that we are all tied into a global economy more so than ever. Putin will only go so far, and just like during the Cold War, we are ahead of them economically. Russian economy is weak what end game could they possibly have? I think there are quite a few diplomatic plays on the table for Europe and the US.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

Blaming our president for Putins actions are idiotic at best

You're right. Obama does not deserve blame for Putin's actions. I've been reading there are efforts afoot to blame Obama for what happens while he's in office. Oh, the humanity!

Edited March 3, 2014 by ExExpat

[deleted-05292014 331]

You're right. Obama does not deserve blame for Putin's actions. I've been reading there are efforts afoot to blame Obama for what happens while he's in office. Oh, the humanity!

President of the United States not President of the Russian federation.

makes about as much sense as blaming Bush 1 for Saddam Hussein invading Kuwait.