Obama to go hat in hand to the Russians to beg forgiveness.

[garbon]

Cammy?

Nein, although Cammy P would probably give her a one night stand.

[saskganesh]

I think the Russians and Iranians have a greater mutual interest in limiting American regional influence in those parts.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

But then did she really say that they were our fault?

That's the way it came across to me.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52O5RF20090325?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

"Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade. Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the death of police officers, soldiers and civilians," Clinton told reporters during her flight to Mexico City.

"I feel very strongly we have a co-responsibility."

So much for the tough-talking hard-nosed SoS we were supposed to have gotten.  It's one thing to make casual mention certain U.S. factors that contribute to the problem-- this amounts to a mea culpa IMO.

One thing Dems are awfully good at is apologizing to foreigners 

Sure... other Nationalities like apologizing. None of us believe Americans do so out of any kind of sincerity though.  :walksoftly&... :

[garbon]

So much for the tough-talking hard-nosed SoS we were supposed to have gotten.  It's one thing to make casual mention certain U.S. factors that contribute to the problem-- this amounts to a mea culpa IMO.

Well we are somewhat responsible. After all its like letting your mentally challenged cousin run his own household and then wonder why he's suffering from poor nutrition and hasn't showered in weeks.

[Alatriste]

Personally I would thank a bit less drama and a bit more reason... the 'hat in hand begging forgiveness' line is really undeserved.

Russia can do several things for you/us that Obama would like done; and that will require several things offered in compensation. If words are a part of that compensation... well, words are about the cheapest ware on Earth. Paying help with them is an arcane art called 'diplomacy' (you are invited to gape with awe and amazement)

Those things include Iran, certainly, and I bet Russia is not terribly interested on acquiring another country with nukes in the vicinity, but having already got on that list China, North Korea, India, Pakistan, Israel, France and Great Britain (plus US nukes) another one isn't so important to Moscow as it is for Washington and Tel Aviv.

Russia probably can be persuaded to cooperate, but not for free... and to be honest, affairs like Kosovo, Georgia and the rest of the Caucasus, growing US influence in ex-Soviet central Asia nations, the anti-ICBM shield, and that deal Bush reached with India aren't going to help.

The Indian deal is specially damaging, in my opinion. On the non proliferation field, because it does America look hypocritical, but given that India is an ally of Russia and the biggest buyer of Russian weapons, it is deemed to be interpreted by the Russians as a shameless seduction attempt.

And regarding the missile shield, I have to state once again that scrapping it would be a sensible idea anyway. Even if working as advertised, a shield won't stop terrorist attacks because they have no need to develop enormously expensive, unreliable, crude ICBMs (even rogue nations like North Korea, if planning a first strike, would probably use underhanded ways to carry their nukes to the designated target and would certainly use them if a working shield was in operation), won't stop bombers, won't stop cruise missiles... it is the Maginot Line of our century, it would be enormously expensive, it would give a false idea of security, and would have gaping holes rendering it useless.

[Tamas]

Because Moscow will take his warm fuzzies, scrunch them into a ball, then shove them right up our ass.

They know how to play the international politics game to their advantage, and they have already shafted the US and will continue to do so at every opportunity (see their desire to sell S-300 SAMs to Iran, shutting down US airbases supporting Afghanistan).

Warm fuzzies are ammunition. Don't give them any. They are not our friends, they don't want to be our friends. In fact, even if they did want to be our friends, their own domestic political situation would not allow it -they *require* an external enemy, and we are it.

The idea that all the warm fuzzies in the world will change this is naive - it is the opposite, warm fuzzies will make it worse.

[Berkut]

Personally I would thank a bit less drama and a bit more reason... the 'hat in hand begging forgiveness' line is really undeserved.

Interesting.

You say it is undeserved, then proceed to argue on a point by point basis that Obama should in fact go to Russia, hat in hand, and beg them to help us and agree to concede on pretty much every single point, all on the basis that all these issues that have come up "don't help" because of course Georgia and such was all the fault of the US, and Russia, presumably, was just some kind of victim.

The US isn't allowed to be friendly with India, because they are Russia's friend first! Stay away!

Fuck that - does Russia own India? Is India in their "sphere of influence"? No - Russia has no sphere of influence anymore, they are not a superpower.

The US should not promote democracy and rule of law in Georgia? Oh no, can't have that, the Russians won't like it! And golly, we have to keep the Russians happy, that is ever so much more important than freedom and democracy!

Russia does not want to help us. No matter what Russia thinks about a nuclear Iran on their border, they obviously care a lot more about countering US power and influence more. This idea that if only we bend over far enough, if only we kiss ass thoroughly enough, we can somehow turn Russia into our friend is a pipe dream.

It isn't going to happen. Obama can spend 4 years figuring this out, as Bush did, or if he is as smart as everyone says he can set aside the campaign rhetoric (that granted served him very well getting elected) that painted all the US-Russian problems as 100% the result if inept Republican diplomacy and learn from what has happened over the last decade.

I suspect he will not though - he is too focused on domestic politics, too inexperienced in the international world, and too naive. We will suffer through several years of Putin using him like a bitch before he figures it out.

And finally, we don't NEED Russia to like us. We do not NEED them to contain Iran. What is more, it will hurt them more in the long run. We should call their bluff, and quit letting them act like they are a hell of a lot more powerful than they are.

[Razgovory]

I'm still not seeing the hat.

[grumbler]

Russia does not want to help us. No matter what Russia thinks about a nuclear Iran on their border, they obviously care a lot more about countering US power and influence more. This idea that if only we bend over far enough, if only we kiss ass thoroughly enough, we can somehow turn Russia into our friend is a pipe dream.

Who are you arguing this with?  No one here is arguing that the US should bend over far enough or kiss ass thoroughly enough to turn Russia into a friend.

Frankly, the entire hysteria around this message (including the laughably absurd characterization of normal diplomacy as going "hat in hand" to "beg forgiveness") is amusing, but so typical of languish debate that the amusement lasts bare moments.

[derspiess]

Frankly, the entire hysteria around this message (including the laughably absurd characterization of normal diplomacy as going "hat in hand" to "beg forgiveness") is amusing, but so typical of languish debate that the amusement lasts bare moments.

Just curious-- what is your opinion on the previous administration's policy/approach toward Russia?

[Sheilbh]

Just curious-- what is your opinion on the previous administration's policy/approach toward Russia?

I think a curious mixture.  Patronising over-friendliness in the first term mixed with quite strong practical incursions into Russia's 'near neighbourhood'.  Second term was more coherent.

[Berkut]

Russia does not want to help us. No matter what Russia thinks about a nuclear Iran on their border, they obviously care a lot more about countering US power and influence more. This idea that if only we bend over far enough, if only we kiss ass thoroughly enough, we can somehow turn Russia into our friend is a pipe dream.

Who are you arguing this with?  No one here is arguing that the US should bend over far enough or kiss ass thoroughly enough to turn Russia into a friend.

Seems like there are several people who think that if only we give up enough, Russia will play ball and help us with iran and Afghanistan - ie, be our friend. More importantly, there seems to be this impression that Russia has some perceived interest in being part of the Western Happy Family. I used to think this myself, in fact - seems like fundamentally they ahve a lot more in common with the West than they do in opposition.

The last decade has dis-abused me of any such notions however.

Frankly, the entire hysteria around this message (including the laughably absurd characterization of normal diplomacy as going "hat in hand" to "beg forgiveness") is amusing, but so typical of languish debate that the amusement lasts bare moments.

"Normal diplomacy" can be characterized as a lot of things. Going to Russia and making noises about how the US needs to press reset buttons, and how we will be happy to give up the things that Russia wants us to, and not saying a word about Georgia, or their desire to sell SAMs to Iran and accepting their insistence that the problems with the relationship is something the US needs to fix, IMO, is "going hat in hand to beg forgiveness". The tone is both pathetic and poorly thought out.

[Berkut]

Just curious-- what is your opinion on the previous administration's policy/approach toward Russia?

I think a curious mixture.  Patronising over-friendliness in the first term mixed with quite strong practical incursions into Russia's 'near neighbourhood'.  Second term was more coherent.

Just curious-- what is your opinion on the previous administration's policy/approach toward Russia?

I think a curious mixture.  Patronising over-friendliness in the first term mixed with quite strong practical incursions into Russia's 'near neighbourhood'.  Second term was more coherent.

Ahh yes, being friendly with them was "patronizing". So even when we are friendly with them, it turns out that justifies their hostility.

I agree that we were overly friendly in the first term, but I don't think that was a mistake except in hindsight. Hell, I was quite the Russophile at the time - I thought Russia was going to move into the Western sphere. Shrug. live and learn - Bush certainly did.

I guess Obama isn't going to learn from his mistakes though, which is unfortunate. We are going to "reset" back to a failed policy.

[Queequeg]

You say it is undeserved, then proceed to argue on a point by point basis that Obama should in fact go to Russia, hat in hand, and beg them to help us and agree to concede on pretty much every single point, all on the basis that all these issues that have come up "don't help" because of course Georgia and such was all the fault of the US, and Russia, presumably, was just some kind of victim.

Good to know that in these tough financial times straw is still pretty cheap. 

The US should not promote democracy and rule of law in Georgia? Oh no, can't have that, the Russians won't like it! And golly, we have to keep the Russians happy, that is ever so much more important than freedom and democracy!

A Democratic Georgia and Russia are not antithetical; what is antithetical with Russia is a Georgia with Balkan delusions of grandeur and power far beyond its natural station that thinks it can shell and invade a non-Georgian enclave protected by the third largest Army in the world and get away with it.  Supporting democracy is one thing; delusions another entirely. 

Russia does not want to help us. No matter what Russia thinks about a nuclear Iran on their border, they obviously care a lot more about countering US power and influence more. This idea that if only we bend over far enough, if only we kiss ass thoroughly enough, we can somehow turn Russia into our friend is a pipe dream.

Friend is one thing, rational player is another.  Russia has more to loose from an irrational, powerful Iran than an America in relative retreat from the region.  Iran has borders and close ethnic ties in the Caucasus and Central Asia, while America is a foreign and incompetent player in the area. 

It isn't going to happen. Obama can spend 4 years figuring this out, as Bush did, or if he is as smart as everyone says he can set aside the campaign rhetoric (that granted served him very well getting elected) that painted all the US-Russian problems as 100% the result if inept Republican diplomacy and learn from what has happened over the last decade.

Bush was probably the stupidest President in terms of Russia policy since...well....probably ever.  He tried to be friends while trying to expand NATO and a Missile Shield system onto the Warsaw Pact.  If Russia really wanted to keep up dollar-for-dollar with American military spending and diplomacy, this might make sense as the Russian economy would collapse like in the 1980s.  But they have no intention of that,meaning that we are spend money on threats that don't exist on a system that doesn't work with money we don't really have.

And finally, we don't NEED Russia to like us. We do not NEED them to contain Iran. What is more, it will hurt them more in the long run. We should call their bluff, and quit letting them act like they are a hell of a lot more powerful than they are.

Yeah, actually we do.  If Russia provides Iran with anti-aircraft missiles and radar defense systems, even if we use top-rung aircraft for an insertion we'd take casualties, and Israel would just not be able to do it.  Not that I think bombing Iran makes sense unless we know they possess bombs and are fueling the or something.

[Berkut]

You say it is undeserved, then proceed to argue on a point by point basis that Obama should in fact go to Russia, hat in hand, and beg them to help us and agree to concede on pretty much every single point, all on the basis that all these issues that have come up "don't help" because of course Georgia and such was all the fault of the US, and Russia, presumably, was just some kind of victim.

Good to know that in these tough financial times straw is still pretty cheap. 

The US should not promote democracy and rule of law in Georgia? Oh no, can't have that, the Russians won't like it! And golly, we have to keep the Russians happy, that is ever so much more important than freedom and democracy!

A Democratic Georgia and Russia are not antithetical; what is antithetical with Russia is a Georgia with Balkan delusions of grandeur and power far beyond its natural station that thinks it can shell and invade a non-Georgian enclave protected by the third largest Army in the world and get away with it.  Supporting democracy is one thing; delusions another entirely. 

I guess that straw was so straw like after all, since you just confirmed that in fact you felt Russia was in the right in invading Georgia.

Not much point in arguing with someone who just swallows Russian pravda in whole and spits it back out like that.

Yeah, Georgia was getting ready to subjugate the Balkans and suppress those poor Russians. In Georgia. Why, Russia had no choice but to roll over them.

I suppose I can live with the "delusion" that supporting democracy is worthwhile on its own merits, not matter how willign the Russians are to stamp it out.