Suckering Russia: a Chess gambit?

You’ve also seen suggestions or implications that somehow Americans are responsible for meddling inside Ukraine.  I have to say that our only interest is for Ukraine to be able to make its own decisions.  And the last thing we want is disorder and chaos in the center of Europe.  — President Barack Obama

In light of the evidence of “meddling inside Ukraine,” Obama and his cohorts in the State Department and the Congressionally funded National Endowment for Democracy are apparently out of sync.  Maybe they’ve lost their internet connection with the change in Net Neutrality policy and need yet another corporate account.   I guess when Yanukovich decided to pull out of the EU deal, a decision that no doubt was the result of the mind altering drugs that Putin had administered to him, Obama could see that Ukraine was no longer able to make its own decisions and needed the benevolent assistance of a little Pravy Sector funny business.

I suppose that this message is supposed to read as everybody calm down now, there’s not going to be a World War III here.  But it might be too late for that.  I think the horse got out of the barn when Kiev chose to send what appears to be a wide-spread assault on Eastern Ukraine.   If this isn’t “disorder and chaos” already, where do we go from here?   Russia’s red line has already been crossed.    The anticipated scenario would be that Russia’s troops would already be crossing the border, because an attack is plain as the Molotov cocktails, the tanks, the helicopters, the mounting death toll, and the utter lack of diplomatic gestures to work things out with the real people on the ground who represent true dissent.  What happens if Russia decides that restraint is now a failed effort?  What will Barack Obama do then?

It’s been  suggested by writer Paul Craig Roberts that the U.S. has not positioned itself for an all out attack and doesn’t have the military means to do anything much at this point.    I’m inclined to agree, but that only proposes a limited time frame in which to act to repel Russian forces, and that may not be the strategy.  It may be a chess move that sacrifices a pawn for a Queen.  The larger target is not Ukraine but Russia itself.

As Roberts states, ”

The Wolfowitz doctrine is the basis of US policy toward Russia (and China). The doctrine regards any power sufficiently strong to remain independent of Washington’s influence to be “hostile.” The doctrine states:

“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”

“The Wolfowitz doctrine justifies Washington’s dominance of all regions. It is consistent with the neoconservative ideology of the US as the “indispensable” and “exceptional” country entitled to world hegemony.

“Russia and China are in the way of US world hegemony. Unless the Wolfowitz doctrine is abandoned, nuclear war is the likely outcome.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s