Back in the old days, when Americanism was more robust than it is now, it used to be said that “politics stops at the water’s edge.” What this was supposed to mean is that our domestic disagreements paled in comparison to whatever it was the Nazis were doing. Now there was a time when this was at least plausible, whether or not it was correct. When there was, or seemed to be, a more cohesive cultural unity tying us all together domestically, it was easier to present a united front to the world, and it was easier to get Americans to all pull together in order to do so.
But at home that cohesive cultural unity is now long gone, and it is taking conservative Christians some time to recognize that it is long gone overseas as well. In short, if Obama is creating so much wreckage here at home, as we all recognize, then why should we believe that he is somehow spreading sweetness and light abroad? If Hillary is as corrupt elsewhere as she is here, then we have every reason to believe her flights around the world were simply an International Shakedown Tour. Why should I unite behind that?
We need to get loose of the simple binary formula that has America in the automatic white hat, with the baddies being anyone we identify as such. However, some critics of American foreign policy don’t want to let go of the standard binary system — they have kept the system but simply switched their default sympathies. But America shouldn’t get the automatic black hat either. It ain’t that simple.
This is because, in the globalized West, there are freedom factions in every nation, and there are soft despotism factions in every nation. For the most part, the soft despotism factions currently have the upper hand in the West, and are in conflict with the hard despotism factions in the East. When sympathies simply drift from our despots to theirs, I am afraid that what is happening is nothing more than the strong horse phenomenon. As Osama bin Laden put it, “When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature, they will like the strong horse.” This doesn’t explain everything, but it does explain why silly girls head off to join ISIS.
So when it is said that the US engineered a coup in Ukraine, the Russians pushed back, our support for the coupsters vanished as the mist, and thus it was that Ukraine lost the Crimea and other related points east, I do remain dubious. I am told this can be easily verified if you read the following 17 articles, believe them all, and let your loyalties run down the appointed nation/state grooves. Now such fecklessness on our part is certainly a possibility, and I do not reject it a priori, but why does it not seem initially likely to me?
When we are doing the (necessary) deep research, we also have to remember to read what is right on the surface. I have a hard time believing that Obama engineered a coup in Ukraine in order to abandon support for it immediately, when maintaining such support would have been relatively painless for him. Without sending troops, or anything like that, Obama could have supplied weapons and rhetorical support to the Ukrainians, and he could have done so to general acclaim. But he has stubbornly resisted doing anything of the kind, acting in various ways that showed that his sympathies were not at all with the new government, and didn’t look as though they ever had been.
This doesn’t smell like a botched coup to me — but if you ask me what it does smell like, I would say that it smells like some lower-level American assurances to some Ukrainians, which somebody then ran with, and which subsequently suffered from an Obama pocket veto. I don’t think this was a master plan that fell apart; I think it was geopolitical incompetence.
So when if I say that Putin is a thug, which he manifestly is, it does not follow from this that I believe everybody in Hillary’s State Department went to work each day energized by their granola bars and pure thoughts. That would follow not. My sympathies are not with Putin, not with Obama, not with Hillary, and not with any petit-thug to be named later who might make it to the top of the current Ukrainian government.
My sympathies are first and foremost with the evangelical church in Ukraine, and second with anyone who loves market freedom there. Suppose I were talking to two teams of people, each containing a church planter and an entrepreneur, and one team was going to plant in Sevastopol and the other was going to plant in Kiev, and both had the same zeal to expand the kingdom. Which team is going to experience the most persecution, official opposition, bureaucratic hassling, and heartache? Right — to ask the question is to answer it. And because Paul teaches us how to pray, this means that we should want — in our prayers — for the street level realities for believing Christians to shake out more like Kiev than Sebastopol.
“I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty” (1 Tim. 2:1–2).
Note that I am not saying we should “send troops” to make it more like one than the other. The apostle doesn’t command us to send troops. He does require us, I believe, to send our sympathetic prayers, prayers that know what direction to push.
But there is, of course, more to say.
@douglaswils just called all women everywhere “silly girls”. how dare he??!!
@jigawatt: thanks for the laugh :)
And the antics you thus parody, which are by no means rare in our society, are another indication of why the people making the kinds of national/international decisions referred to above are… not in the least qualified to make.
If one grows up treating logic with contempt, one will make foreign policy while treating logic with contempt. And the problems one faces in foreign policy are more than hard enough for someone who doesn’t have both hands tied behind their back.
Best,
Keith
A friend of mine who spent several years working for the government always reminds me: “Don’t insist on ascribing to malice what could just as easily be explained by incompetence.”
The simple binary formula has fallen apart among so many different groups (not the least of which are us millennial Evangelicals and our Catholics compadres) here in the United States for several reasons. (1) We see just how awful our own leaders act personally and overseas. (2) The groups pounding the drum for war (primarily the neo-cons) have created so many “baddies” over there that we fail to stay rallied. (3) The information age has given us a front row view of the atrocities of war and the suffering of people who are innocent that it is hard to see… Read more »
Doug, I think you are right in that our sympathies/positions on this issue are closer than I originally expected. And I appreciate you raising awareness that we ought to be praying for Ukrainian Christians more than complaining about foreign policy. Although, foreign policy is still important, and whenever I have seen you make a reference to this general issue of Putin/Russia/Crimea/Ukraine/etc., it seems to me that you kinda want troops to be sent. So I am pleased that you’re not saying that we should “send troops.” But I still wonder if maybe you want troops to be sent, which is… Read more »
@jigawatt — no, no, that’s not the point.
It’s that he used demeaning language about young women who lack the intelligence and discretion to discern that young men who wish to hack off the heads of those young women’s fathers and brothers, given the chance, are not good prospects for building a life with. It’s just terrible to call someone who does something unmitigatedly wicked and foolish, “silly.”
Well, um, yeah, er, of COURSE I didn’t mean that he meant that about ALL women, heh heh heh [pulls collar]. But stupid, blockheaded, chicken-brained, idiot male men like him should never use demeaning language to refer to ANY woman. Doing that demeans ALL women everywhere. That’s um, yep, that’s what I meant.
Doug: with regards to the “freedom” experienced in Kiev compared to that in Russia, which freedoms are those? Freedom from corruption, soft depostism or economic interference objectively as opposed to Russia? Or the freedom to have minarets and abortion clinics in the cities and gay pride parades in the streets, like in the EU?
About the Evangelical church in Ukraine … I visited Donetsk in January 1995, spending a week on the campus of what was then called Donetsk Bible College. The campus was basically unchanged from it’s days as a Komsomol (Soviet Youth camp). In the days since then, it grew both in numbers of students and in buildings. The last pictures I saw were unrecognisable as the same campus. Unfortunately, along with the other growth, I have been informed there had been growth in financial mismanagement. Their last graduation was conducted early and, even if the campus hasn’t been taken over, the… Read more »
Why do you assume that State Dept support for the coupsters has vanished? Only John McCain would assume a lack of ground troops implies a lack of support. The US has been and continues to support color revolutions through direct and indirect NGO means. This is not a secret. I would not be so sure that you are supporting the side of the Church. Right now you find yourself on the side that supports the right for Pussy Riot to desecrate churches and those that would have Russian children brainwashed into celebrating homosexuality as American children are. As for Putin… Read more »
What? It is not anywhere close to plainly obvious that Russia is less free than Ukraine.
The particulars of the situation seem to be conspicuously off the table but how about some more general issues? Should Russia not have a Monroe Doctrine type of interest in bordering countries and would they not be compelled to act militarily to support those interests? If the US is justified being militarily involved in the Ukraine, is there ANY geopolitical situation that you could conceive of that would be none of our business?
Putin is manifestly a thug – okay, but how, other than being manifestly less competent, have any of the Ukrainian leaders of the past couple decades been any different?
Are there that many more evangelicals in the Ukraine than in Russia, and do they fare better in the former than in the latter? Maybe, for all I know, but if so you need to say so and explain how you know so.
Is Kiev is really all that amenable to market freedom? Or any other kind of freedom?
Doug, I appreciate your attempts to grapple with this issue. I’m sorry about the length of this comment, but this is not a quick issue by any means. I have to say that I think you are overlooking some pretty incontrovertible facts. No, I’m not going to give you 17 articles, but here are some basic things that I believe puts this issue into its proper context: 1. Soon after Viktor Yanukovych baulked at signing the EU Association Agreement, having found it was going to cost the country around $160billion to implement, demonstrators started to appear on the streets of… Read more »
Thanks for the contribution Rob Slane, I found it edifying.
Rob Slane-
People like you are why cnn.com no longer allow comments on their stories.
…and that’s a compliment.
Doug, I just wanted to post one more comment, this time in connection with the religious freedoms issue you touched upon. Here are three brief things: 1. Orthodox churches in Western Ukraine have come under increasing persecution of late. Just this week, in the Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral, it is reported that guys with Pravy Sektor (openly neo-Nazi) logos beat the guard on duty, before blocking the entrance and threatening to kill the ruling bishop, clergy and worshippers. In recent weeks, there have also been reports of churches being desecrated in the Volyn and Rivne regions, and a church in Lviv being… Read more »
Thanks for clearing that up, jigawatt. I can now move forward in outrage, having established it on a sound basis. What a relief.
Intolerant, power-mad misogynist Neanderthals like Wilson do all men everywhere a disservice when they call out the objectively depraved actions of any women anywhere, using words like “silly.”
How was that?
Before the internet, and most certainly, before television, it was almost impossible for average citizens to know what international conflicts were even happening, let alone offer any opinions on such. I believe this kept our government relatively free of foreign conflict for a very long time. Those were the days.
A significant number of Ukrainians are pro-EU and want closer ties with the west. That’s the root problem, that Ukraine is divided down this east-west line. The additional problem is that Ukraine is right in Russia’s backyard, and the US and EU have been antagonizing Russia for a while. Without sending troops, or anything like that, Obama could have supplied weapons and rhetorical support to the Ukrainians, and he could have done so to general acclaim. But he has stubbornly resisted doing anything of the kind, acting in various ways that showed that his sympathies were not at all with… Read more »
Now compare the facts as laid out by Rob Slane to the war mongering propaganda videos Glenn Beck is putting out. Its the other side of the coin from liberals who get their news from Jon Stewart.
Matt,
As with you last post, I do agree. However, do you really feel like the US and EU supporting the citizens of the Ukraine who even you admit are pro-West should constituted “antagonizing Russia”? Or were you referring to other actions on the part of the US and EU?
Under His Mercy,
BJ
BJ,
I’m not Matt, but I would say Yes, the US and EU supporting the citizens of Ukraine who are pro west – even if pro west is a good thing, andI don’t take for granted it is – would inevitably antagonize Russia.
Okay, guys. Hold up. I realize that Putin is some kind of heroic defender of Christianity and decency and what not to some of you people, but let’s start facing reality: A. The Russian Orthodox Church has been a wholly owned subsidiary of the Russian State, no matter that state, since before Peter the Great smashed the Old Believers. B. The Russian Orthodox Church makes Creflo Dollar and his ilk look like pikers, and the Pope look like a Protestant. As far as I am concerned, the only really bad part about what Pussy Riot did was that they messed… Read more »
Props to you BJ, first and following comment both. And yes, Tom, spot on. The “church” as defined by the Russian government should be a unpalatable entity to those who wish to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It pains me extremely to say this, but Putin and the Russian Orthodox Patriarch are beginning to resemble two mafia bosses who have joined hands so that each may further cement their own control over their territory. Anyone who doubts this should look into the Russian Orthodox Church’s involvement in the Ukrainian invasion and occupation, and Putin’s involvement in helping the ROC… Read more »
The need for me is to post anonymously.
Someone recently commented on propaganda in America explaining that you can discern the White House’s propaganda simply by understanding what they are saying:
“What your eyes see, is not what your eyes saw. What your ears hear, is not what your ears heard. Here is what you saw and heard. “
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/germany-concerned-about-aggressive-nato-stance-on-ukraine-a-1022193.html
I think of antagonism as mostly pertaining to NATO and EU expansion, as well as interference in Ukrainian internal politics. Rhetorical support or sympathy is to be expected and Russia can hardly complain there. Ukraine is almost certainly better off with the EU than Russia, but there should be a way for Ukraine to get the benefits of closer EU ties without actually joining it.
That said, seizing Crimea was a terrible move on Russia’s part, as it basically destroyed any underdog/moral-high-ground sympathy they had earned up to this point.
The moral high ground is a pretty ephemeral concept. The Sevastopol navel base, on the other hand, is a very concrete Russian asset.
http://csis.org/blog/crimeas-strategic-value-russia