Five days that shook world politics

[bemildred]

Nice piece, many interesting bits.

Iran, Iraq and China figure as major differences in the trans-Atlantic divide. European powers insist on a constructive engagement of Iran, firmly rejecting the US neo-conservative agenda ("coalition of the willing", preemptive strikes, "regime change", etc). On Iraq, while willing to let the US off the hook, the five leading European countries refuse to put their troops on the ground in Iraq. At best, Europe is willing to launch civilian training missions in Iraq and to co-host an international conference on Iraq's reconstruction.

Economic interests in the oil-rich Persian Gulf region; estimation that the US is simply incapable of undertaking an Iraq-like invasion of Iran (for reasons both of lack of financial resources and imperial overstretch); widely prevalent antipathy toward the Bush administration in the European public opinion; expanding Muslim populations in Europe (specially in France and Germany); and the sheer diminution of European dependency on the US for its security ever since the removal of the Soviet threat in the East - all these are contributing factors in the European calculus.

---

The US would like to draw Russia away from Europe (and China) toward the US energy market. Russia is not only holding vast reserves of energy but is also flush with oil-revenue cash to invest. The Russian economy is in better shape than ever before: the investment climate is improving; it is keen to repay debts ahead of schedule; and, with high oil prices, things could get still better for Russia's economy. Thus, whereas Russia's planned expansion into the US energy market was originally meant to take place by 2010 or so, the Bratislava summit brought the date forward to 2008 (running concurrently with Bush's term in office).

---

Washington has closed the Yukos file. Bush did not even refer to Yukos at Bratislava - a festering wound with multiple scabs that was meant to be at the very heart of Putin's authoritarian tendencies. Again, according to Russia's Novosti agency, quoting a "disclosure" by an unnamed "high-ranking US administration spokesperson", Bush and Putin simply "merged their positions" over Iran.

Asia Times

[TheFarseer]

1. Hmmmmmmmm

Russia has oil, which we need, and cash to invest, which we want. It sure is great that we're doing everything we can to piss them off.

[Igel]

2. And certainly counterintuitive. n/t

[bemildred]

3. The problem is they think the Russians are stupid.

They are trying to run a used-car salesman grade shuck-and-jive
game on the Russians, and Pooty-Poot, being sharper than any
of the Bushites, is not only not buying anything, but he's
cleaning their clock in terms of international politics.

Edit: The Bushites have had some success in Ukraine, Uzbekistan,
Georgia, etc., in annoying and encroaching on the Russians, but
those efforts are like advanced and undefended pawns, they will
fall of their own weight without a larger defensive structure to
support them. And in the larger arena, Russia is refusing their
provocations and slowly choking them in the consequences of their
own excesses.

Edit: There are hidden issues here. One reason that Syria is so
"in the news" is because Iran is not. As it says, we aren't going
to attack Iran, we aren't going to do anything much to Iran, the
EU and Russia and China will not stand for it, and the Bushites CANNOT
just sit there with Iraq haemorrhaging all over the place, so that
leaves Syria. And, guess what? Syria just happens to be the
culprit-du-jour for a couple nearby atrocities. It is as noticeable
that Iran is NOT mentioned as "backing the terrorists" right now as
that Syria is.

One has to wonder also, what Turkey will have to say if the Bushites
try to really heat things up in Syria?

[TheFarseer]

4. We're starting to hear more frequently things like

the WMD's are in Syria. Some rep from TX said that and added we should take an F15 and nuke them to wild applause. They are spoiling to invade something. Syria is as good as anything. I don't think that would go over well anywhere, particularly Russia. I think(I hope) they are starting the think that Iran is just not going to happen. I'm not sure if Syria has much in the way of friends(although you would think Egypt, Jordan and the gang at least). Iran seems to have some nations willing to stand up for it.

[Darranar]

5. A pretty good analysis, in my opinion...

The US does seem to be underestimating Russia; it is more than a prize, it is a player in itself, one both the US and the EU seem eager to undermine. US policy in regard to Moscow is not precisely consistent; a strange combination of carrot and stick seems to be at work there, and not a particularly effective one.

If the dollar continues experiencing problems the US will be in deep trouble; it might well result in the oil going to China, which is proving to be quite an obstacle.

As for the EU, their refusal to stop dealing with China is another bad sign for the US, though they do seem to be more or less cooperating with US efforts to contain Russia (Ukraine comes to mind.)

[bemildred]

6. I thought it was.

Russia has vast resources and they are a great people,
hence the caution there. They have vast social problems too,
but so does China, so do we.

The EU wants to play the US and China off against each other,
hence they will play nice with both, and with Russia. The goal
is multi-lateral stability, not domination.

US foreign policy wonks are stuck in the past, they had the good
fortune to be "leading" a nation of vast resources and strength and
have not had to learn a thing in a long time, they have got away
with all sorts of simple-mindedness and stupidity, but the fat
times are ending, and they have no new ideas.