As the time draws close for Vladimir Putin to relinquish his
title as president of Russia, it appears he is still running for
office -- the office of icon. Putin's barely disguised aim is to be
regarded as the third sainted pillar of modern Russian leadership,
joining Lenin and Stalin.
In Putin's calculation, the time is ripe for Russia to regain
its status as a world military superpower. Its oil and gas export
income is immense, while the United States is in the throes of an
economic downturn and at a military disadvantage due to its Iraq
and Afghanistan commitments and preoccupation with Islamic
terrorism.
There are other factors that make it a propitious moment for
Russia to return to military superpower competition: Putin and his
team have monitored the American scene well and recognize the
cyclical nature of the American public's focus on national
security. They clearly evaluate this as a period of diminished
interest and support for strategic matters from the American party
that controls Congress, the Democrats.
It is not illogical that Russian strategists would advise Putin
that the United States is currently in economic and diplomatic
decline. It is, however, his personal desire to insure a triumphant
place in history that drives him. He desires to be viewed as the
man who successfully regained the international power that Russia
originally had during the days of the Soviet Union.
Putin was widely quoted this past week in respect to NATO and
U.S. refusal to acknowledge Russian security concerns: "In effect
we are being forced to retaliate...Over the next several years
Russia should start production of new types of weapons systems,
which are in no way inferior to what other states have, and in some
cases superior."
This is as close to a declaration of cold war as one can expect.
Apologists -- and there are many -- say that Putin merely reflects
a broad Russian fear of the NATO countries' interest in dominating
Russia. Putin suggested in another of his tutorials that much of
Western interest in Russia is due to "a mounting struggle for
resources." He went on, "Many conflicts, foreign policy acts and
diplomatic demarches smell of oil and gas."
He has turned around the European Union's fear of Moscow's
ability to control European energy sources into an aggressive
European stance. Righteously Putin has announced he will take his
warning against NATO expansion and its responsibility for
restarting "a new arms race" (his term) to the NATO summit meeting
in April. Interestingly, he never once mentioned anything about the
new Russian president about to be chosen.
DOES RUSSIA HAVE ANY legitimate reason to fear Western domination?
The answer is obviously negative. The only driving force in the
current Russian strategic offensive is the desire of Vladimir
Putin's Kremlin to take advantage of American political weakness
and launch a massive rearmament program. This will be not only the
symbol of Russia's return to international superpower status, but
the hallmark of Putin's personal ambition.
What is so hard to understand is why this Russian leader has
chosen the route of autocracy over the peaceful democracy so
available to him as an outgrowth of his popularity. Why return to
the totalitarian fabric of the Soviet Union? The answer is in the
Russian predilection for strong leadership as a counter to a
national paranoia.
There is really no tradition of freedom in Russia despite
various abortive efforts. There is a tradition of seeking security
through domestic repression and power through colonial expansion.
The sacrifice of civil rights to attain these ends is once again a
given in Russian governance. Lenin showed the way. Stalin enforced
that way. And Putin seeks to reestablish the international
respect/fear that accompanied what the other two accomplished --
without the ideological baggage.
Hail to Caesar Vladimir, the new god-king of Russia. How will
the next administration in Washington act towards a Russian leader
who has announced that he will target missiles at Ukraine if its
application to join NATO is accepted; and do the same to the Czech
Republic and Poland if the American missile defense system is
deployed there?
The left in American politics is trying hard to downplay or
ignore totally the fact that the United States is in the most
dangerous position internationally it has been since the end of the
Cold War. That stance may be understandable in strictly domestic
political terms, but quite irresponsible when it comes to national
security.
topics:
Foreign Policy, Vladimir Putin, Islam, Military, Iraq, Russia, European Union, NATO, Energy, Oil
