-
The View From the Other Side
May 17, 2013 | 23 comments
-
Cyprus Uber Alles
May 10, 2013 | 9 comments
-
After Hugo
May 3, 2013 | 16 comments
-
Theory and Practice of Terrorism
April 26, 2013 | 24 comments
-
Border Security Games
April 19, 2013 | 26 comments
At Large
Troubles on the Horizon
Islamists running amok is hardly the only national security crisis the U.S. is going to face in the coming months.
By December of this year the Legislative and Executive departments of the United States Government will have to do what they hate. They must settle the financial ramifications of defending this country — and if it wishes — its allies also. As little as it has been profitable politically to address or even take notice of these issues during the campaign season, these matters will be front and center by January 1. We might as well prepare for them right now.
To begin with, there is the real possibility that Israel will launch a preemptive strike on Iranian nuclear weapon development facilities. Some say this will occur before the U.S. elections and others say it will be afterward. In any case, the personal animosity between Obama and Netanyahu has not helped thoughtful coordination between Israel and the U.S. The Iranian response to the Israeli action we already know or reasonably suspect: an attempt will be made to close the Strait of Hormuz and strangle petroleum transport from Persian Gulf countries. And, of course, a furious counter-strike by Iranian air assets and missiles on Israel. The entire Middle East would be in danger of conflagration.
The killing of the American ambassador and three staffers in Benghazi came only briefly after the well-organized attack on the U.S. Embassy in Cairo on 9/11/12. Purportedly these activities were due to an insulting depiction of the Prophet Mohammed in an American internet film trailer. The calculus of Washington’s diplomatic relations in North Africa and throughout the Islamic world has become far less stable.
Not necessarily in any order of importance, but certainly appropriate in relative terms, is the already in process Syrian internal conflict in which Russia and China refuse to assist the U.N. in forcing a ceasefire as a precursor to negotiations. The Sunni/Shia traditional animosity that infuses the political environment of this civil war acts as both a stimulant and inhibitor for expansion of the fighting. Hezbollah is waiting to defend Shia interests while simultaneously Hamas would like to embrace a broad Sunni uprising. But neither wants the losses associated with another war with Israel that quite possibly would follow.
Chet Nagle broke the story in the Daily Caller that the Russians have been caught sending a nuclear sub covertly into the Gulf of Mexico while they resume their Cold War practice of long range bomber intrusion of U.S. air space. They even have boasted of their ability to launch EMP attacks on the U.S. any time they wish. Meanwhile China refuses to compromise on its position against the international standing of the South China Sea and seeks to press its claims to oil and mineral rights with the aid of ostentatious surface and submarine naval maneuvers.
The impression is created around the world that the United States is not overly concerned about what is going on. Apparently Mr. Putin in Moscow doesn’t think much about American alertness. He is preoccupied with his own plans for rebuilding Russia’s status in the global power arena. President Obama has done what the Russian president had insisted upon in indicating “flexibility ” on the issue of negotiating withdrawal of American anti-missile facilities from Eastern Europe. This was in spite of the fact that the world had to learn about this potential strategic capitulation through an inadvertent “open mike” message sent by Obama sotto voce via Dmitry Medvedev.
While the U.S. becomes an increasingly less influential factor in Middle East politics and strategic affairs — except as a target — Russia and China have grown in political involvement and influence. Beijing views its diplomatic activities in Africa and the Middle East as part of its broader political thrusts in support of its economic ambitions. Moscow, on the other hand, focuses on the Middle East primarily to regain its regional role that had existed during Soviet days. Vladimir Putin seeks to use an increased participation in Middle Eastern affairs as the mechanism to reassert leverage within the entire Islamic world, but most importantly among the Muslim regions of the North Caucasus and former Soviet republics of Central Asia.
The consternation and fear that pervades Europe’s financial centers rises and falls as if an invading army is marching in its direction. The generals of the economic world meet regularly to monitor the monetary battlefield. Greece would appear already to have been counted out even though the Germans continue begrudgingly to pour more resources into the battle to maintain the principal lines of resistance for the European Union and its beleaguered euro. The U.S. dollar remains relatively strong for the moment, but technical experts agree that if any new blows occur to the European theater — such as a new Middle Eastern battlefront with an expected negative impact on oil markets — the American economy also will be adversely affected to a serious degree.
The new American president, whether its Romney or once again Obama, will have to operate within an international environment that does not allow for simplistic solutions to complex economic problems — as is the case during the election season. The “arithmetic” (his term) of ex-president Clinton has no pertinence in this real world of global contest. His views, and others of one time importance but who now are politically irrelevant, will hold no value. The American public — and its leaders on all levels — will have to deal with reality.
A major factor in this reality is the need to maintain high defense expenditures to balance the energized effort being put forth by both Russia and China regarding the military aspects of their science and technology. This outlay will be matched by the high cost of maintaining a combat-ready volunteer armed force — a factor that cannot be substantially reduced without reducing effectiveness and versatility. That’s the real world, and it will be upon us shortly.
About the Author
George H. Wittman writes a weekly column on international affairs for The American Spectator online. He was the founding chairman of the National Institute for Public Policy.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (22) | Leave a comment
More Articles by George H. Wittman
More Articles From At Large
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/09/14/troubles-on-the-horizon
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The End of the Castros?
- Wincing at Cumberbatch
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Appleby| 9.14.12 @ 7:10AM
When I lived in Buffalo back in the 1980s, they were being overwhelmed by the opening round of the end of Unions as companies moved out of the Union states and south to Right To Work states. American Standard (makers of toilets, in Buffalo) called for a strike against management, and management said "If you go on strike, we will close this plant and move it to North Carolina." Cut to pickets standing in front of locked gates and empty, dark buildings, with shocked expressions, and their erstwhile leader said, "We didn't think they meant it."
Later on came the closing of one of the last steel plants in Lackawanna under the same rubric; management announced that they had been debating whether to close the steel plant in Lackawanna or the steel plant in Johnstown PA, and thanked the unions for helping them make up their minds. Again came the cry, "We didn't think they meant it."
Hippie Scum at all levels of American culture is standing in the street now all over America and in some erstwhile allied nations, banking furiously on their fantastical belief that "They Don't Mean It." Since they themselves never mean ANYTHING they say, why should anybody else?
Some of us do. And as my Daddy used to tell us, it's not that bullet with your name on it you have to worry about: it's all those bullets labeled "To Whom It May Concern."
Albert Constantine Jr.| 9.14.12 @ 8:44AM
It is not just unions or hippies that think that “They didn’t really mean it”. Statements about the Constitution as a charter of negative liberties, spreading the wealth around, “White folks’ greed runs a world in need”, etc. were all out there in 2008, yet a portion of the electorate chose to ignore his history and his own words and cast a vote for him thinking that somehow, he wouldn’t be who he has always been.
TLP| 9.14.12 @ 9:57AM
THERE IS A CONTEST that can be found on Paul Kengor's Article.
Everyone is Welcome, and I hear that there will be Prizes.
Those who missed the last one?
Here's your Chance.
Gary B| 9.14.12 @ 8:38AM
Obama reminds me of history's insane royals. The let-them-eat-cake variety. Eventually, they get what's coming to them. Unfortunately, with Obama, we're going to get it, too. Romney's rescue of American can't come a moment too soon. And, it'll be up to the Tea Party to keep him on the straight and narrow.
Gary B| 9.14.12 @ 8:48AM
Imagine a campaign poster. An image of Obama with the background depicting the entire Middle East in flames with dead ambassadors all over the place and the caption says, "I just need more time" or something preposterous like that. Now, imagine an American actually voting for him.
What brought us to this? Demonizing private enterprise, slandering moral society and offers of free stuff from the left. It really is that simple.
Von Mises Jr| 9.14.12 @ 9:33AM
If the Middle East erupts in flames and the Strait of Hormuz is shut, oil may very well go to $200 per barrel. Not only gasoline, but every good consumed will necessarily skyrocket. Doubling the cost of living for the poor will bring unrest.
And President Nero fiddles at campaign stops and gets down like a clown with rappers and celebrities. It is almost like he knows the shit is going to hit the fan and he is hoarding as much dough for himself and his cronies before the storm.
TLP| 9.14.12 @ 9:58AM
Contest.
Paul Kengor.
Be there.
Al Adab| 9.14.12 @ 3:58PM
...and all the while we continue to export our domestic production and pay inflated international prices for the oil which we and our military requires to function. Congruently, we are hostage to an administration which views oil as a problem to be avoided rather than the critical strategic commodity it is. Like it or not the time has come for this administration to recognize the facts on the ground and worry about the security of this nation.
Von Mises Jr| 9.15.12 @ 4:03AM
Oil is not to be avoided, capitalism is to be avoided. Barry uses a shit load of jet fuel every week. He just wants to buy it from the commies rather than let our people have private sector jobs and U.S. create wealth.
CNOOC is Chinese state owned; Russia owns Lukoil, Rosneft, Gazprom and Transnet. Venezuela nationalized oil. Brazil's PBR is listed as NaN for ownership of shares. The Middle East dictators fund their regimes with oil revenue.
Do we have the only statists that hate oil? I doubt it.
cicero| 9.14.12 @ 3:18PM
Couple of things. First off, it will not be that easy for the Iranians to close the Straights, especially when their capital has absorbed the Israeli assault. Second, even if the price of oil goes up, it won't stay there for very long. The Middle East has to sell its oil for whatever it can get for it. So far, no one has found a good recipe for the stuff, and it wreaks havoc with the digestive system. It seems that everyone and his brother is now finding oil in their backyard, and will sell it to whomever they can. The Arab countries whose oil fields are not set on fire in the conflict will have to keep selling as much as they can, just to keep from losing their own heads. After all, that is their only source of revenue, and if the money stops, everyone revolts - and not just against the West.
Time to call their bluffs. Those most in danger right now are the leaders who have been having way too much fun poking fingers in the Infidels' eyes.
mike 3/505| 9.14.12 @ 3:30PM
They don't need to actually close it...just the threat or attempt, will send the price up.
Hardcard| 9.14.12 @ 3:53PM
close all embassys in all muslim countries, evacuate all US citizens from the same. demand all hostile host countries pay for damaged US property. expell all foreign muslims from US soil, stop funding the UN and foreign aid to muslim countries. send Israel more military support.
Al Adab| 9.14.12 @ 3:54PM
The Left continues to deny that the prime responsibility of government is to defend the nation and its citizens anywhere in the world. They decry military expenditures while ever demanding more for social programs and education. Every now and then, like now, reality hits them in the face and they are unable to reconcile their utopian idealism with facts on the ground. That is a dangerous state for the nation and its people.
Occam's Tool| 9.14.12 @ 8:10PM
Yes, but Nuking the twenty largest Iranian cities followed by seizing the oilfields will bring the price down again...
Dimitry_Aleksandrovich| 9.15.12 @ 1:44AM
If the United States is floating down sh#t creek without a paddle its they have no one to blame but themselves. The State Department has been empowering Sunni fanatics (Salafists/Wahhabists) in the Middle and Near East since the Soviet-Afghan war and quite possibly even before then. It was the United States government that called for and carried out regime change in Iraq, it was the United States government that called for and helped facilitate (even providing special forces and air support) regime change in Libya, it was the United States that called on Ben Ali and Mubarak to step down and it is the United States supporting fanatic Sunni Islamists (Al Qaeda?) in Syria against the Baathist Assad government.
Russia is not to blame...China is not to blame...Iran is not to blame...if Uncle Sam wants to look for culprits he should first look at himself. Nobody forced the U.S. to support American friendly (and hated by their own people) tyrants throughout the region for the sake of Western oil interests...they did that on their own. Nobody forced the U.S. and the Brits to depose of Mossadegh in Iran and replace him with the hated Shah that would eventually lead to the Shia Islamist revolution of 1979...the US did that on their own. Nobody forces the US to back Israel to the detriment of displaced Palestinians living under Israeli occupation...the US did that on their own.
Dimitry_Aleksandrovich| 9.15.12 @ 2:04AM
When you put it all together the picture of US involvement in the Middle East becomes very clear and its not that pretty to look at for us Americans (yes I am American by birth and upbringing).
As for Russia...what does Mr. Whitman expect Russia to do with Uncle Sam threatening at his doorstep? When the Soviet Union fell Russia extended its hand to the United States which shook Russia's hand and then stabbed Russia in the back exploiting its natural resources, expanding NATO to her borders even to nations that are historical enemies of pre-Soviet Russia, the bombardment of her smaller Orthodox and Slavic ally Serbia, the stripping of Kosovo (the Orthodox heartland of the Serbian people) from Serbia handing it over to predominantly Muslim Albanian KLA terrorists, the egging on of that nationalist Georgian nut job Sakaashvilli to start a war with Russia over the breakaway provinces of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and the missile defense system strategically located near Russia's borders that's supposedly aimed at non-existant Iranian missiles. Put all of it together and is it no wonder that President Putin would seem outright hostile to US foreign policy and that Russian subs may be in the Gulf of Mexico or their long range bombers violating US airspace.
Dimitry_Aleksandrovich| 9.15.12 @ 2:04AM
It's been said before that their are CIA fingerprints on the Muslim insurgency in Russia's southern territory (Chechnya, Dagestan, Ingushetia) yet Americans wonder why Russia stands beside Bashar al Assad who is by the way the protector of Syria's Christians not the Sunni Islamists of the FSA who have American backing.
Go ahead put all of it together. The United States is in decline because the average American has abdicated the thrown of American political power and handed it over to the corporate and political elite who like parasites have sucked the lifeblood out of this nation and infected it with a rabid blind nationalism disguised as messianic idealism so that it can subdue other nations for the parasites to feast upon.
Martin kzovich| 9.15.12 @ 7:02AM
Now the election of Obama has brought our chickens home to roost as it were. The very most top priority #1 is... Get rid of Obama and as many Marxists as possible this November. It is time to stop maoning and goaning and back Mickey Mouse ( Mitt Romney ) in the strongest terms.
Godiva| 9.16.12 @ 1:55PM
Comment Part One
It perhaps would be more useful to your readers to draw their attention to the following issues with respect to Russia:
1) The Russian Federation and The PRC have an “entente”—that is—an agreement to support each other, in this case most likely militarily. This is an agreement between a Communist country (The PRC) and a professed Democracy (The Russian Federation) who, in reality, is a Dictatorship under Vladimir Putin.
2) Russia has effected this entente with The PRC by selling their military apparatus and technology through their export arm, Rosoboronexport. Rosoboronexport has sold so much to The PRC, The PRC has now reverse engineered this technology and needs to buy little from Russia’s present technology (likely foiling Putin’s desires to continue to profit financially through these exports).
3) Finding the export of their military technology and apparatus a “lucrative venture,” Russia has supplied these same technologies to Pakistan (who are now also included in the “entente” with The PRC and Russia), to Syria, to most of South America, and also to the United States! The whole world can know this because Rosoboronexport reports these activities on their own website which anyone in the world can read! (Recently, however, Rosoboronexport decided to stop exporting their military technology for reasons known only to them.)
Godiva| 9.16.12 @ 1:56PM
Comment Part Two
4) Halliburton—subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer—engages in similar activities. However unlike their Russian counterpart, Rosoboronexport, one must read about Halliburton’s exploits as reported by “Watch Dog” organizations such as www.HaliburtonWatch.org in order to get the real facts.
5) Now that Russia has effectively “armed” most of the world that wants to be in conflict with each other we are now poised for World War III (inclusive of Syria and The U.S.). (You can’t have a real war these days unless you equip your presumed “enemy” and/or anyone else.)
6) Russia might have avoided this situation by observing their own history with the beginnings of Imperial Japanese Military might, (which was developed by The British) and then turned, in 1905, against Imperial Russia with the catastrophic battles over Port Arthur on The Pacific Ocean (a port Imperial Russia leased from Imperial China—Qing Dynasty—for winter use), eventually leading to the Japanese bombing The U.S. at Pearl Harbor in 1941 (36 years later). The Japanese would not have had this military knowledge or technology if they had not been equipped and trained by The British at the turn of the 19th century. (Since some funding to the Japanese is believed to have come from The U.S., The U.S. effectively made it possible for Japan to attack The U.S.).
Godiva| 9.16.12 @ 2:00PM
Comment Part Three
7) In my opinion, Putin and Rosoboronexport have not only armed the rest of the world (inclusive of The U.S.), they have sold out The Russian Federation’s national security. If Putin EVER listens to someone rational amongst his countrymen, he should be rectifying this issue of Russia’s national security by re-engineering Russia’s defense and other military technology—and then NOT sell it to ANYONE!
8) These matters make discussions of anti-missile locations by The U.S. rather irrelevant, don’t they? That the 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbor was a “surprise” means that no-one in The U.S. had a map or an atlas and no-one in The U.S. was “connecting the dots” on that atlas as Imperial Japan progressed from Port Arthur southward along the Asian Pacific Rim. Cartography really is, even today, a useful occupation (so is reading the newspapers). That I am intolerant of imbecility should be apparent from this comment—I would hope!
Godiva| 9.16.12 @ 2:02PM
Comment Part Four
9) That I find it a really bad idea for a true Democracy to have an “entente” with anyone who is NOT a true Democracy should be apparent. Russia should not have an “entente” with ANYONE—inclusive of The U.S.—who only pretends to be a Democracy, as well! And this is because there isn’t really any country on the planet that is a true Democracy!
10) I will close by noting that, like Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Putin is “all about himself” and cares little about being a useful leader to his countrymen.
I am, sincerely yours,
Godiva