So as I wrap up my discussion of issues surrounding Ukraine, I want to do three things, which I will take in the standard order of 1,2,and 3.
First I want to provide a handful of links (from various sane perspectives) to help illustrate how much this is like trying to unscramble a pan full of eggs. My paramount concern, as I have already mentioned, has to do with the plight of fellow Protestants in Ukraine — as this short piece illustrates well. Crimea presents some unique tangles, as my friend Peter Hitchens points out.
Alexander Motyl gives a critique of the “realist” understanding of Russian/Ukrainian geopolitics here. And Timothy Snyder takes the discussion way back.
Second, the question that many have wanted me to get to is what I think we should do about all this. How does this cash out? The simple part concerns what I would not do. I do not believe that we should commit American troops to any conflict like this. I am not an isolationist, but I believe that any constitutional foreign policy will generally be accused of isolationism. We are not the world’s policeman, and we ought not to commit troops anywhere unless our national security is directly threatened. And where it is arguably threatened, but by an inchoate threat like ISIS, I believe we ought to use letters of marque and reprisal instead of regular troops. In short, I am in favor of a strong military defense, and am no fan at all of things like neo-con nation-building.
But third, I do believe that we should have supported the (new) Kiev government far more vigorously than we have done. We had given assurances to them about their borders, and this should have meant more than the assurance that we would dither.
So this is a good time to use my standard joke. If I were president — and what a glorious three days that would be! — what would I do about the renewed Russian aggressiveness in eastern Europe? My approach would have three components. The first would be a vigorous, full-throated verbal defense of the Ukrainians, and not some tepid State Department functionoid telling reporters that “of course” we “stand with” the people of Ukraine. The second is that I would sign an agreement with the Ukrainians, the Poles, the Baltic states, and whoever else over there who was willing to sign, in order to sell them defensive anti-missile shield systems — the kind that Obama double-crossed the Poles on. This is the kind of defense expenditure that even a Quaker should be able to love. Let’s help these people with capacity to knock incoming missiles out of the sky. What’s not to love? It is tangible support, but it is demonstrably not offensive weaponry. And the third element of my grand strategy would be to abolish the EPA, and open up a full-tilt energy race with Russia. What with Alaska and fracking and North Dakota and the Keystone Pipeline and removal of all the bureaucratic insanities, we should be able to reduce Russia’s hegemonic flexing within a very short time. And without one bullet being fired.
I’ve gotta disagree with giving the Ukrainians a missile defense system. It wouldn’t do them a whole lot of good since the pro-Russian forces are mainly ground troops. And if you remember they (the psuedo-Russian troops) took heat for using a very similar system that shot down a civilian aircraft. Do we really want to trust the Ukrainians to not do the same (as we would get the finger pointed at us eventually)? Thirdly, it’s likely that some (if not all) of these systems would be captured by the pro-Russian forces (Russia would probably give whatever military support needed to… Read more »
“We are not the world’s policeman, and we ought not to commit troops anywhere unless our national security is directly threatened. And where it is arguably threatened, but by an inchoate threat like ISIS, I believe we ought to use letters of marque and reprisal instead of regular troops. In short, I am in favor of a strong military defense, and am no fan at all of things like neo-con nation-building.”
And may I humbly request that your administration change the name back to “The War Department” to convey the true rai·son d’ê·tre?
Ah, but maybe we can un-fry an egg. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/07/980715083913.htm
Doug, I want to pick up on three points you make (apologies for the length once again): 1. You say: “We are not the world’s policeman, and we ought not to commit troops anywhere unless our national security is directly threatened…In short, I am in favor of a strong military defense, and am no fan at all of things like neo-con nation-building.” You then go on to say “I do believe that we should have supported the (new) Kiev government far more vigorously than we have done.” I’m afraid that these statements would have the likes of Victoria Nuland and… Read more »
Off Topic Bleg:
Pastor, if you are moved to address the issue, I ask you do.
If post-millenialism is true, then the world is ‘getting better’ and being restored.
Why then, have the gifts of the Apostle’s ceased? Under post-millenialism, should they not be multiplying?
I have thought of one counter-argument to this; to paraphrase Clausewitz, “in Spiritual matters, quantity has a quality all its own.” One could argue that God is building out numbers before building up gifts. I do not find this convincing because God is a ‘yes-and’ God–the Guy who fills the basket to overflowing.
cheers.
t
Doug, No sarcasm here, I promise, but is basing a state’s foreign policy on the best interests of fellow Protestants, as opposed to the best interests of the state’s citizens, another post millennial thing? Actual question there, I still don’t understand post millennialism all that well. If the persecuted were Roman Catholics or Eastern Catholics would you equally advocate U.S. involvement? You are talking about involvement after all, even if it doesn’t include direct military action. Is the well being of Protestants everywhere of equal concern, or, why Ukraine in particular? How about, say, the plight of Christians in China?… Read more »
And all we have to do is steal people’s lands so a foreign owned company can run oil through the Unted States leaving us with a 1000 mile wide target for terrorist attack.
Doug,
Thank you for this series of posts. The discussion has been illuminating, and I think you have made several good points as well as provided helpful insights.
If I were president, and that too would probably only last a few days, I probably wouldn’t do everything you suggest, but I might make Rob Slane my VP and you my Secretary of State.
First of all, as a Ukrainian I want to thank Douglas for paying attention to this problem. I have not read any thoughts of Western theologians about this issue before. I would like to react to what Rob Slane wrote in his second point. First, the term “renewed Russian aggressiveness in Eastern Europe” is surely correct in the view of the annexation of Crimea, the war in Donbass and aggresive Russian propaganda. Second, in your second point you seem to assume that there exist only Russia and USA in this world. You consider NATO enlargement as if it was only… Read more »
With respect to the third point of Rob Slane. You describe the situation in Ukraine as a clash of two paradigms: the pluralist and the monist ones. The irony is, however, that the new government is surely the proponent of the pluralist paradigm. It can be very easily seen in the religious sphere where all denominations (including Protestants) enjoy freedom. There are no nationalists in the government. The minister of internal affairs and some other ministers give their interviews only in Russian. No nationalistic party is represented in the parliament. Two nationalistic candidates received less that 2% in presidental elections… Read more »
With respect to Russian speaking people in Ukraine. I remember one post of a Russian pastor on facebook. He heard in Russia many times that Russian speaking people in Ukraine face some problems because of their language. So he asked Russian speaking Ukrainians among his followers and friends to share their experience. He received hundreds of replies and all of them confirmed that they never experienced any problems in Ukraine. I wish all people were as wise as this pastor and trusted their fellow believers more than Russian propaganda. If somebody here reads Russian and wants to read this post… Read more »
Such a US presidency might generate enough “Intolerista facial expressions you never knew were possible” comedy to captivate the eastern European belligerents and bring peace for a time. At least if you add some good bread to go with the circus.
Though I suspect no one wants his candidacy to be pronounced “(his name) / Slane”. It might give someone the wrong idea.
@Robert: A situation that is currently maintained now, it’s just that the targets are called railroads, instead of pipelines @Rob Slane: When Wilson speaks of “renewed Russian aggressiveness” he means that a historical pattern is being repeated. No, for the past two decades, Russia has not attacked Eastern Europe. However, for the five decades before that, it controlled Eastern Europe more ruthlessly than even the most fevered anti-neocon nightmares. For the two decades before that, it was trying to pull itself together after the Bolshevik Revolution–and starving Ukrainians for daring to own their own farms. For about a century before… Read more »
@Tom. You miss the point. Russia’s “renewed aggressiveness” is nothing of the sort. Their actions are a “defensive response” to “continued Western aggression” most notably seen in the relentless movement of the far from peaceful NATO alliance towards their borders. How would the U.S. react if Russia started moving military bases up South America, and then began conducting military exercises in Mexico literally a mile or so from the State of Texas. I think we all know the answer to that, and it would be disingenuous of us, would it not, to describe an American response to that as an… Read more »
@dima (March 21, 2015 at 12:13 pm and 12:44): 1. You mention the war in Donbass as an example of Russian aggression. However, the war in the Donbass was started by the Kiev government, under the interim presidency of Oleksandr Turchynov, and not by Moscow. When offered the opportunity to seek peace through dialogue, as the Geneva Statement of April 17th, and the Minsk agreement of September 5th compelled them to do, the Kiev government repeatedly showed its unwillingness and instead returned to war. As an aside, if they are really being attacked by Russia, as they have constantly claimed,… Read more »
@Rob: You miss the point, again. NATO is not an aggressive military alliance–the treaty only activates in case of attack upon a member–and the Russians have, historically, been the ones mucking around in Eastern Europe. Well, technically, the Germans, Austrians, and Turks have as well, but the latter two are nonentities these days, and the first is gelded. Also, anyone who thinks, these days, that the Euros are capable of mounting offensive operations is living in the past. Also, the United States has not been nearly as nasty to Mexico–or Cuba–as Russia was to Ukraine or the Baltics. I don’t… Read more »
@Tom
See my 4th comment to @dima at 3:22pm on 22nd March. NATO has been involved in enough conflicts (Serbia, Afghanistan, Libya and to a certain extent Syria) where it has acted in an aggressive manner against nations that have not attacked one of its members to refute the idea that it is merely a defensive organisation.
1. The war in Donbass was started by the Russian extremist Strelkov with his “unit”. He confirmed this himself openly in the interview in Russian media: “I was the one who pulled the trigger of this war”. By the way, in the beginning there was some difference between local people who were dissatisfied with the new government in Kiev and Russians who provoked the instability and eventually the war. This can be easily demonstrated by the way how the administrative buildings in Kramatorsk were captured. Local and more moderate people (together with some policemen who joined them) tried to stop… Read more »
A sub-context of this discussion is the loss of legitimacy by an apostate American state.
Since God never changes and His ways are our ways, I expect to see more of this as we remain loyal to our Master:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/lone-vet-returns-to-iraq-to-fight-isis/
Herein a prediction. At a near point, America will target that Christian.
Brothers and sisters in Christ, one more simple thought about Ukraine. If you want to know more about the events in Ukraine and you are “lost” in different opinions and estimations, is it not a good idea to contact your fellow Reformed believers in Ukraine instead of relying wholly on other sources? Besides Ukrainians, there are also many American and Dutch missionaries who serve the Lord in Ukraine. They might not be experts in geopolitics, but they can tell you a lot about Maidan and the war as eye-witnesses. Maybe such conversations would change your opinion or at least show… Read more »
@dima. Thanks for your thoughtful and detailed response. I agree that this conversation could go on for a long time, and we’ve both probably got better things to do with our time. So I’ll make this my last post, and hand over to you for the last word, if you wish: 1. Igor Girkin (Strelkov) strikes me as the sort of man who would like to take credit for “pulling the trigger of war”. However, this seems more a case of self-aggrandisement than reality. He and his men took over the town of Slovyansk on April 12th 2014, five days… Read more »
@dima. Thanks for your thoughtful and detailed response. I agree that this conversation could go on for a long time, and we’ve both probably got better things to do with our time. So I’ll make this my last post, and hand over to you for the last word, if you wish. I’ll do it as two posts as I tried it as one, but it may have been too long: 1. Igor Girkin (aka Strelkov) strikes me as the sort of man who would like to take credit for “pulling the trigger of war”. However, this seems more a case… Read more »
6. “Russian aggression was real in Georgia”? Even the EU eventually admitted that the conflict was started by Georgia. 7. You say: “I think that the most important point here is the following one: should the will of small nations be respected, or everything in the world must be decided by the will of giants like USA or Russia?” Here we can finally agree on something ;) Where we will probably disagree, though, is on who has been the party of aggression. I believe that since the end of the Cold War, this has been clear. The US (or its… Read more »
1. “Nationalism” You didn’t give any proofs of the alleged “nationalism” of Tymoshenko, Lyashko and Avakov. You also admitted that there is no representative of the Pravy Sektor in the government. I thought that after this you will finally admit that your accusations are groundless. But now you make a desperate attempt to prove the Ukrainian “nationalism” by a reference to the prime-minister! It happened that he was called “the most dangerous man in Europe” by a certain Professor. Well, I can give you dozen of links where Putin is called “the most dangerous man in the world”. Does this… Read more »