Mirabile Dictu — An Intelligent Foreign Policy Decision
By Robert Higgs • Thursday September 17, 2009 8:47 AM PDT • 8 Comments
To the great astonishment of all of us who believed the U.S. government incapable of making an intelligent foreign and defense policy decision, the Obama administration has decided to terminate the U.S. plan to place anti-missile missiles in Poland and related radars in the Czech Republic. The plan had mightily provoked the Russian government, which not unreasonably viewed the program as part of a U.S. plan to stage a successful first-strike on Russia while crippling the Russians’ missile counterattack. This decision hardly means, of course, that U.S. ambitions and plans for total earth-and-space military domination have been altered in the large. Yet, by removing an element that provoked the Russians unnecessarily, the recent announcement should help to calm the nervousness in Moscow.
Now, if only something can calm the nervousness and will to power in Washington, D.C., the world will be able to breathe easier. Although the end of the Cold War pushed the threat of nuclear war out of the public’s consciousness, this threat remains the most menacing one for all mankind, and efforts to diminish it now seem stuck in low gear.
“provoked the Russian government, which not unreasonably viewed the program as part of a U.S. plan to stage a successful first-strike on Russia while crippling the Russians’ missile counterattack.”
Bob, do you really believe the Russians have a “reasonable” fear of U.S. attack? After all, THEY have a long history of attacking Poland and carving it up going back centuries. They then put Jews on a “hunting preserve” for occasional pogroms. Don’t forget that Stalin’s Drive to the West (book title) began when he joined with Hitler in carving up that part of Europe.
Not a good day for the Poles.
Jonathan Bean | Sep 17, 2009 | Reply
Jon,
If I didn’t believe the Russians’ fear to be reasonable, I would not have used that word to describe it. A few quick points.
First, the historical situation in which Russia dominated and periodically gobbled up Poland is not at all the situation that now exists. The likelihood of Russia’s invading Poland in the near future is nil, for various reasons, including Russia’s economic and military weakness and NATO’s great military superiority.
Second, the reason the U.S. government gave for placing the antimissile facilities in Poland and the Czech Republic does not wash. Iran does not have, and cannot soon develop, the long-range missiles against which those facilities were supposed to be used. Besides, the U.S. Navy roams the Persian Gulf in great strength, and it has the capability to neutralize any Iranian missiles that might be developed to menace the United States.
Third, the U.S. maintains more than 800 military bases in more than 100 countries around the world, including some near Russia, not to speak of the world-roaming U.S. Navy. The United States is the only power now capable of posing more than a local threat to any country. And U.S. policy explicitly aims at world hegemony. Of course, the Russians are afraid of a U.S. attack; they’d be foolish not to be afraid, especially considering the relentless U.S. efforts to develop and deploy space-based weapons.
Fourth, since the end of the Cold War, the United States has repeatedly humiliated and provoked Russia, especially by pushing NATO toward the east, right up to Russia’s doorsteps. This has greatly augmented Russian fears.
Finally, in a nuclear war between the United States and Russia, the Poles would certainly lose massively, as would nearly all the other people of this earth. Because the provocative placement of missiles in Poland increases the risk of nuclear war, it increases, rather than reduces, the risk that Poland will be devastated at some future time.
Playing games with nuclear weapons, as the world’s great powers have done from the beginning of the Nuclear Age, is probably the single stupidest move taken by governments during the past sixty years. So far (since the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki) the world has escaped, but the history of the Cold War reveals that on many occasions, this escape was a very, very close thing. If humanity is to survive, such idiotic maneuvering must be terminated before the human race is reduced to a handful of pathetic survivors living in caves at a bare subsistence level.
Robert Higgs | Sep 17, 2009 | Reply
I believe when this idea was first floated, supposedly to thwart a future Iranian threat, Putin proposed some sort of joint installation in southern Russia. Why not take them up on the idea? Why not engage them rather than provoke them? The Russians can’t be thrilled about a nuclear-armed crazy man on their southern flank. How did Bush ever expect to convince the Russians that missiles placed in Poland are meant for Iran, which lies so far south?
Warren Gibson | Sep 17, 2009 | Reply
Jonathan, how exactly would this pork-barrel radar boondoggle prevent any attack from the East?
Last I checked both Poland and the Czech Republic are in NATO. Do you REALLY think the Ruskies would even remotely consider attacking a NATO member? If so, then I’m sorry, but the neocon propaganda clearly got the better of you.
Alex | Sep 18, 2009 | Reply
I’m still wondering what was on the other side of this deal. I doubt our great interventionist State Department did this on the principle that we should stay out of Russia’s business and backyard. Maybe the State Department came to the conclusion that we can’t pay for everything? Nah. Maybe Medvedev and Putin said that we need to back off or they will publicly trash the dollar? Seems the only important leader to really say anything openly about our monetary policy was Angela Merkel but she never directly said that the dollar is garbage. Do the recent failed talks with Iran have something to do with it? Maybe Russia will start to get on the side of our State Department about restricting the ambitions for nuclear weapons in Iran? What do you think Dr. Higgs? Could it be that our State Department really just made the proper non-interventionist policy decision? I wonder.
Wes Dillard | Sep 18, 2009 | Reply
Wes,
Your speculation about bringing the Russians over to help exert pressure on the Iranians is a leading item of current commentary on this subject. It’s a plausible speculation. I myself don’t much care why the U.S. government made this decision. It’s a good decision, even if it was made for bad reasons. (And, after all, the U.S. government’s making a good decision for good reasons really does defy our mental assimilation, does it not?)
Robert Higgs | Sep 18, 2009 | Reply
I’ll take what I can get. Finally home from work and the BBC tells me that Gen. McChrystal says we need to almost quituple our troops in Afganistan.
Wes Dillard | Sep 21, 2009 | Reply
I thought the proposed “missile defense” made perfect sense. It was a fictitious defense against a fictitious danger. Everything makes sense, you see, if you can just remember that the real world is on the other side of the looking glass.
Stefan Schreier | Sep 22, 2009 | Reply