Iran Flexes Its Missiles; Russia Objects to US Shield

Tag : curtain binding

You make a good point about the Russians perceiving that they mighthave few many military options between the most extreme and mostpaltry. This is where the decline of Russia’s conventionalarmed forces and its lack of a professional officer and NCO corpscould cause Russia to build more nukes, as they would seem a cheapdeterrent in comparison to a truly well-trained and equippedconventional force. But how do you enforce immigration policiesalong a very long border with the world’s most populousnation using Topol ICBMs? And if Russia thought it could afford tomaintain its present stockpile, why is the Kremlin so eager to takeup Senator McCain’s offer of even deeper cuts in ourrespective arsenals? Because they know that they cannot afford tomaintain even the nukes they have now.
The American and British conservatives presently arguing thatRussia is engaged in some huge military buildup (perhaps, as TomBarnett charges, to justify building more F-22s and nuclear attacksubmarines while the ground pounders need more trucks and men) arenot doing much for their credibility. In the case of the mosthardcore Russophobes in D.C., their views of Russia wereessentially frozen in 1984 with some blend of the contempt for thebasket case of the 90s thrown in. They had the expectation thatRussia was supposed to sit back and say nothing as we cut it out ofenergy deals and influence in its own back yard. When the Chineseexploit a big offshore oil find in the Straits of Florida and theRussians develop Venezuela’s heavy oil fields with Canadianassistance, perhaps we’ll feel a tiny twinge of what Moscowfelt in the late 90s when American oil men were striking black goldin Azerbaijan and sending it away from Russia.
While threatening to point nukes at specific targets in Europe is ahostile gesture, in the recent past this crowd has viewed anyreassertion of Russian power as automaticlly a threat to the West.For example, when the Russians played hardball and cut offUkraine’s gas supplies in 2006, this was viewed as a direthreat, rather than one country getting tiring of subsidizing cheapgas for another - heck, even Belarus was overnight turned intoanother victim of the mean old Kremlin rather than a country thatneeded to get off the dole.
At the end of the day, the weak Russia of the 90s that allowedChechnya to become a playground for international terrorists was afar greater threat to the West than the Russia of today. Jul 8, 2008 - 10:17 pm Alexis:
I don’t think it is wise to allow ourselves to be deterred byany fanatical state.
It is insanity to allow ourselves to let al-Qaeda usePakistan’s nuclear deterrent as a shield against an Americanresponse against al-Qaeda. When Pakistan allows al-Qaeda to camp onits territory while prohibiting the United States from attackingal-Qaeda forces, al-Qaeda should be considered to be in de factocontrol over Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent becausePakistan’s actions effectively create a nuclear umbrella foral-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda’s lack of tactical control overPakistan’s nuclear weapons doesn’t undermineal-Qaeda’s strategic control over those weapons.
Al-Qaeda will attack the United States regardless of what Americansmay do in response. So, why do we let ourselves get deterred byPakistan’s nuclear umbrella? Respect for Pakistan’snuclear umbrella effectively creates a stronghold for al-Qaeda thatwe won’t destroy while the terrorists can attack us withimpunity.