> but in 1948, when Britain and the U.S. took unmistakable steps towards setting up a separate West German state
At this point, an alternative version of the course of history should be discussed: what would have happened if Germany had been made a "neutral" buffer state between the blocs after the Second World War, as the USSR envisioned. How long could this "neutral" state have lasted anyway? After all, this is precisely Putin's demand, and also Gorbachev's regret: the states between Poland and Ukraine should have remained "neutral".
> As in 1963-75, easing the crisis would turn the competition between Putin and the West into a political one, and that is a competition that the West should be able to win.
That’s not a solution, that’s the problem.
Putin is NOT threatened by the NATO, not at all. Putin and other autocrats (who ask Putin for help, such as the belarusian dictator Lukashenko) are threatened by political aspirations for more freedom and democracy among their populations, which seek their salvation and protection in stronger ties to the West. In extreme cases, this can be NATO, it can be the EU, but it can also simply be economic and cultural influence. Putin does not want the West to offer a perspective to the aspirations for more freedom and democracy. Putin wants the West itself to end this perspective, once and for all. In the Cold War, the flight to the West was stopped by the construction of the Wall. What Putin is demanding of the West today is basically that this time the West itself builds a new wall.
Did the former wall between the blocs make peace possible? Yes, it made it possible that the cold war did not turn into a nuclear world war. Does the West agree to a new wall behind which the autocrats feel safe? That is the question.
"We must remember, as Clausewitz reminded his readers two centuries ago, that the ultimate objective is always to bring about peace."
Sadly, it is not excessively cynical of me to question whether perpetual conflict and even war is the "ultimate" objective of the cabal of arms sellers and cyber-tech pirates who run Washington, D.C.
As your first commenter, noribori, demonstrates, there's apparently a bottomless pit of a market for heroic narratives of bullies and masses longing to breathe free. But, here in the real world, Ukraine is miffed that Nordstream2 might go into operation, allowing Russia to sell most of their gas westward without the extortionate Ukrainian skim operation.
Ukraine has managed to make itself the poorest country in Europe, surpassing hapless Moldova for that honor. Russia took Crimea in 2014 and more than doubled per capita incomes with long overdue infrastructure investment.
The U.S. policy of abandoning all of the treaty constraints on nuclear weapons is clearly on Putin's mind. Why doesn't it worry more U.S. pundits?
Wouldm't it be rather logical, that certainly Poland, and probably others circling nearby, would be eager for a juicy chunk of West Ukraine, if Putin tears off and bolts down a quivering, dripping chunk of its Eastern hind quarter, similarly to the way in which both Poland and Hungary had been ravening for large raw chunk portions of Czechoslovakia, if Hitler were allowed and offered a German one by both Britain and France for free?
I have an old friend who believes that the CFR (Rhodes Secret Society, Milner Group, etc.) is still running everything in global politics and grand strategy.
For me, thinking this is rather like thinking that the leaderships of the Protestant sects of the Reformation, as they emerged, were guiding the Reformation toward "The Enlightenment"!
Professor This was noribori, in the prior Ukraine post,
"...At this point, an alternative version of the course of history should be discussed: what would have happened if Germany had been made a "neutral" buffer state between the blocs after the Second World War, as the USSR envisioned. How long could this "neutral" state have lasted anyway? After all, this is precisely Putin's demand, and also Gorbachev's regret: the states between Poland and Ukraine should have remained "neutral"..." noribori
Nori espousing the US Morgenthau Plan, not merely a buffer, but a full agrarianization and deindustrialization, for Germany after WWII.
FDR had been wholehearteedly on board, hated Germany since at least WWI, and this plan was promoted and envisioned (as Nori admits, by Stalin, and even put into effect at first by us, by use of agents of influence within the US administration, especially Harry Dexter White, at Treasury.
6 comments:
> but in 1948, when Britain and the U.S. took unmistakable steps towards setting up a separate West German state
At this point, an alternative version of the course of history should be discussed: what would have happened if Germany had been made a "neutral" buffer state between the blocs after the Second World War, as the USSR envisioned. How long could this "neutral" state have lasted anyway? After all, this is precisely Putin's demand, and also Gorbachev's regret: the states between Poland and Ukraine should have remained "neutral".
> As in 1963-75, easing the crisis would turn the competition between Putin and the West into a political one, and that is a competition that the West should be able to win.
That’s not a solution, that’s the problem.
Putin is NOT threatened by the NATO, not at all. Putin and other autocrats (who ask Putin for help, such as the belarusian dictator Lukashenko) are threatened by political aspirations for more freedom and democracy among their populations, which seek their salvation and protection in stronger ties to the West. In extreme cases, this can be NATO, it can be the EU, but it can also simply be economic and cultural influence. Putin does not want the West to offer a perspective to the aspirations for more freedom and democracy. Putin wants the West itself to end this perspective, once and for all. In the Cold War, the flight to the West was stopped by the construction of the Wall. What Putin is demanding of the West today is basically that this time the West itself builds a new wall.
Did the former wall between the blocs make peace possible? Yes, it made it possible that the cold war did not turn into a nuclear world war. Does the West agree to a new wall behind which the autocrats feel safe? That is the question.
"We must remember, as Clausewitz reminded his readers two centuries ago, that the ultimate objective is always to bring about peace."
Sadly, it is not excessively cynical of me to question whether perpetual conflict and even war is the "ultimate" objective of the cabal of arms sellers and cyber-tech pirates who run Washington, D.C.
As your first commenter, noribori, demonstrates, there's apparently a bottomless pit of a market for heroic narratives of bullies and masses longing to breathe free. But, here in the real world, Ukraine is miffed that Nordstream2 might go into operation, allowing Russia to sell most of their gas westward without the extortionate Ukrainian skim operation.
Ukraine has managed to make itself the poorest country in Europe, surpassing hapless Moldova for that honor. Russia took Crimea in 2014 and more than doubled per capita incomes with long overdue infrastructure investment.
The U.S. policy of abandoning all of the treaty constraints on nuclear weapons is clearly on Putin's mind. Why doesn't it worry more U.S. pundits?
Professor
Interesting post, ably reprising our received views here of the 20th Century.
My interest in Ukraine versus Russia is largely a sporting one.
But I do also have a big bet on big oil, planning to make a killing if and when Putin pulls the trigger!
But that too is sporting!
All the best
Professor
Wouldm't it be rather logical, that certainly Poland, and probably others circling nearby, would be eager for a juicy chunk of West Ukraine, if Putin tears off and bolts down a quivering, dripping chunk of its Eastern hind quarter, similarly to the way in which both Poland and Hungary had been ravening for large raw chunk portions of Czechoslovakia, if Hitler were allowed and offered a German one by both Britain and France for free?
All the best
Professor
I have an old friend who believes that the CFR (Rhodes Secret Society, Milner Group, etc.) is still running everything in global politics and grand strategy.
For me, thinking this is rather like thinking that the leaderships of the Protestant sects of the Reformation, as they emerged, were guiding the Reformation toward "The Enlightenment"!
All the best
Professor
This was noribori, in the prior Ukraine post,
"...At this point, an alternative version of the course of history should be discussed: what would have happened if Germany had been made a "neutral" buffer state between the blocs after the Second World War, as the USSR envisioned. How long could this "neutral" state have lasted anyway? After all, this is precisely Putin's demand, and also Gorbachev's regret: the states between Poland and Ukraine should have remained "neutral"..." noribori
Nori espousing the US Morgenthau Plan, not merely a buffer, but a full agrarianization and deindustrialization, for Germany after WWII.
FDR had been wholehearteedly on board, hated Germany since at least WWI, and this plan was promoted and envisioned (as Nori admits, by Stalin, and even put into effect at first by us, by use of agents of influence within the US administration, especially Harry Dexter White, at Treasury.
All the best
Post a Comment