Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Remember after 9/11 people thought we had the foreign policy dream team...look how that played out.
The important negotiations here will be with the EU.
-spence
|
I might actually agree with Spence on this. Not about the 9/11 bit and "how that played out." The playing out involved back and forth opposition and agreement with those who were not on the "dream team." And an ultimate dismantling of the dream teams policies by those who followed. But that's, as Spence likes to say, old news. And if he were true to the implication that old news is no longer relevant, one wonders why he likes to so often bring up old news. I guess if that tactic suits his argument of the present moment (but subject to change the next day or hour in another thread) it's acceptable--after all, it's CHANGE. And change is the highest aspiration of the progressive mind. Apparently, the more often, the better.
But I digress. I may actually agree with the important negotiations being with the EU. If Spence means by that negotiations amongst Russia, the EU, and Ukraine. In fact, those are the ONLY relevant negotiations. And, power to truth, if the EU is not militarily strong enough or morally resolute enough to stand up to the same of Putin's Russia, the "negotiations" may be one sided in results.
The U.S. has too long been the military backbone for Western Europe--and NATO. That is not only outside our sphere of influence, but we are, again, in the process of weakening our own military might. Europe, if it wants to stand on whatever it considers its principles, needs to be willing to fight for them.
As far as "economic" sanctions--those cut both ways. Besides, Russia has always managed to be outside of Western Europe's economic sphere. And it is forming other alliances rapidly, now, in response to threats against its hegemony in what it considers its sphere of influence.