In the light of the Russian campaign in Syria what Obama calls «strategic patience,» his critics think paralysis, but advisers recommend the U.S. administration to wait. NATO summit of heads of the Ministry of defence in Brussels strengthens the flanks, but a clear strategy of response to Moscow’s actions, it seems, has no market. «Putin is incredibly good at playing bad cards because he knows exactly what she wants,» I assume Condoleezza rice and Robert gates.
«This year, President Obama described his approach to such crises as the civil war in Syria, «strategic patience and persistence». However, when Russian jets and rockets through the sky over Syria, what he calls patience, many critics seem palsy, writes Peter Baker in The New York Times. — Obama has made it clear that he does not want to confront the Russians and to run the risk of escalation, and that he has no new broad strategy of conflict resolution and the fight against «Islamic state».
Obama believes offers a more decisive action in Syria is a bad recipe. His advisers are studying, is it possible to do something to protect the allies of the Syrian opposition in the face of Russian forces, but do not want to provide them with weapons for use against Russian military aircraft, the article says.
«Instead, Obama’s advisers have to understand the Rubik’s cube of middle East policy, where each step like causes blockage and makes more nedosyagaemoi consistent solution, writes Baker. — As a result, Obama gets the recommendations, essentially to wait out the intervention of Russia. Frustrated by their inability to resolve the crisis more than four years, the President and his team have expressed confidence that Moscow almost certainly will not be more successful.» They wait until Russia will get stuck in Syria, as bogged down in Afghanistan in the 1980s, the article says.
«Critics of the Obama administration, for its part, indicated that Obama followed much earlier to arm the rebels and Pro-American or not to outline «red lines» the requirement to use chemical weapons, or not to perform a threat to inflict missile strikes against Assad for violating of this requirement,» reports the author.
«We recognize both of these errors, — said Michael McFaul, a former adviser to Obama and former U.S. Ambassador to the Russian Federation. — However, this does not mean that we have a solution applicable today.»
«Puzzled exclamations are heard in the capitals of Washington and London to Berlin and Ankara: how can Vladimir Putin with its crumbling economy and a second-class army constantly ask the direction of geopolitical events?» — writing former U.S. Secretary of state Condoleezza rice and former Secretary of defense Robert gates in an article for The Washington Post.
The West sometimes reacts by ridiculing Putin, they say, only reveals its weakness. Or complacency: he’ll be sorry that you tried, Russia could not succeed. Or anxiety: it will make a bad situation worse. And finally, humility: perhaps the Russians would help to stabilize the situation, we ought to accept their help in the fight against «Islamic state».
But «Putin is incredibly good at playing bad cards because he knows exactly what he wants,» the authors write. Hold in power of Assad, it protects the interests of Russia, and it has no relation to the «Islamic state». «Any rebel group contrary to the interests of Russia, is Moscow’s terrorist organization. We have seen this behavior in Ukraine», — said in the article.
Putin is not a sentimental man, and if Assad will be a hindrance, he will gladly go on a acceptable replacement.
«President Obama and Secretary of state John Kerry claimed that the Syrian crisis cannot be resolved by military means. This is true, but Moscow understands that diplomacy follows the situation on the ground, and not Vice versa, so Russia and Iran are creating a favorable situation».
«The definition of success, Moscow is not the same that we have — noted rice and gates. — Russia is ready to promote the creation of so-called failed States and frozen conflicts in Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine. Why should Syria be any different? If the Pro-Russian population can only manage part of the state, so be it». And the well-being of the population is not Moscow’s problem.
«Putin’s actions in Syria are old — fashioned policy of the great powers. Russia is strong at home when she’s strong internationally — so says Putin’s propaganda, and Russians buy it. Russia feels self-worth when considers itself a great power, the article says. But can you think of anything produced in Russia, other than oil? And here the Russian armed forces were set in motion».
«So what can we do?» The authors, firstly, urged to reject Putin’s argument that he reacts to the violation of the world order. «Putin is really reacting to the situation in the middle East, but we are talking about the vacuum created by our indecision, in such places as Libya and Iraq,’ rice and gates. — Putin as a defender of international stability? Thank you».
Secondly, the authors urge the U.S. «to create a favorable situation on the ground: introducing a no-fly zone and to establish shelters for the local population to provide active support to Kurdish forces, Sunni tribes and remnants of the Iraqi intelligence».
«Third, we must coordinate our military actions with the Russians. We must do everything possible to avoid incidents between us.»
«Finally, we have to accept Putin for who he is. Enough to say that we need a better understanding of Russian motives. The Russians know their purpose very well: to ensure that Russian interests in the middle East by whatever means necessary. What here is unclear?» — make rice and gates.
«On Thursday, faced with the largest since the cold war military threat, weakened the Alliance took measures to strengthen the flanks in the middle East and in Europe, as Russia continues to test the reliability of the underlying principle of NATO collective defence,» writes The New York Times, commenting on the summit of the heads of the defense Ministry to NATO in Brussels.
The authors note a number of statements of participants on the intensification of military exercises of the Alliance and the placement in Eastern and Central Europe a small additional staff.
«We carry the largest since the end of the cold war, the strengthening of our collective defence,» said NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg held before the meeting of the defense Ministers, after the meeting said: «All this says to the citizens of NATO: NATO will protect you, NATO is in place, NATO is ready».
NATO’s action, announced Thursday, are primarily symbolic, however, Russia quickly reacted to the message of the UK’s intention to deploy units on a continuous basis in the Baltic States, Poland and Ukraine. Putin’s press Secretary Dmitry Peskov said that the UK «contrived pretext (…) of an imaginary threat that comes from Russia, is the camouflage which covered the plans for the further expansion of NATO towards our borders». Russia, he said, would answer, «to restore the necessary parity».
What does Vladimir Putin? This was a tricky question at the meeting of defense Ministers of NATO member States in Brussels. Yet one thing is clear: the President of Russia wants to show that Russia is a great power, and he succeeds. First, the annexation of the Crimea, then the war in Eastern Ukraine, and now large-scale intervention in Syria. «It turns out that Putin acts, and NATO is only responsible for his actions,» writes political columnist of Der Spiegel, Markus Becker.
To enhance the Eastern European members of the Alliance increases, the number of the NATO response Force (NRF) to 40 thousand and sends a few hundred troops to Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia to help with training.
«But this is more symbolic steps, — says the journalist. — Finding the right strategic response to the behavior of Russia, NATO is given with great difficulty. Unfortunately Western strategists, there is no clear policy toward the Kremlin has not yet seen», although Moscow, said in Brussels the U.S. Secretary of defense Ashton Carter, has a «chaotic, self-destructive, unprofessional.» Another Western diplomat said that Moscow seems to be «minimize the conflict in Ukraine 14 days ago» and it perfectly illustrates, «how well Putin control the conflict». «But Putin’s goals are not clearly», — says columnist.
Also confusing the situation around Syria. Russia said it intends to fight with the terrorist organization «Islamic state», but in reality is bombing the Syrian opposition. NATO responds in its own way: Stoltenberg said in Brussels that the Alliance is ready if necessary to deploy a rapid reaction force to the South, i.e. Turkey. At the same time, the Minister of defence of Germany Ursula von der Leyen announced that Germany’s decision on the withdrawal of Patriot defense systems from Turkey is unwavering.
«Thus, the Western response to the Syrian crisis is limited to one application to send rapid reaction force to the southern flank. But this is not a strategy. Strategy for the southern flank of NATO, seems now not at all,» concludes Becker.
InoPressa. Global players and middle Eastern «Rubik’s cube» 09.10.2015