DW: US-Russian honeymoon over?
Fiona Clark wonders if recent statements by US President Donald Trump could mean that US-Russian relations may not be as rosy as many Russians would have hoped.
Russians had their hearts set on Donald Trump. He was the hope for a better future - the man who would re-set relations between the US and Russia - a task they believe Hillary Clinton could never achieve. But less than three weeks into the Trump era, and the Kremlin may be wishing it had kept its fingers out of the pie.
Already the Russian media has gone from "All hail President Trump" to asking whether the incumbent has fallen prey to the neocons within the Republican Party. Yes, he's still defended and praised over the way he deflected criticism of President Vladimir Putin when the latter was accused of being a killer by Fox news presenter, Bill O'Reilly,and he's reiterated his respect for the Russian leader. But his actions in these first few weeks speak loudly that little has really changed in the White House when it comes to policy.
Read more ....
Update: An end to bromance: Russia’s in love with Trump, right? Not as much as you think (Danielle Ryan, Salon)
WNU Editor: From my experience .... when Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Barack Obama won their elections for U.S. President, they got positive reviews from Russia .... a short honeymoon that fell apart when international issues could not be resolved amicably. In the case of President Trump .... we are witnessing the same thing. But (IMHO) the environment this time around is different .... and what has made the Kremlin hopeful is the recognition that President Trump himself has been consistent in his views towards Russian President Putin, and to Russia itself. And while it is true that there are many in President Trump's government who are hostile towards the Kremlin .... President Trump himself has been reserved and open to see what happens. This in itself is a refreshing break from the past .... and while there are no guarantees that relations will now change for the better .... this opportunity to change the dialogue should be grabbed by both leaders. I guess this probably explains why Russian President Putin is eager to sit down and talk to President Trump .... even though the guidelines for what will be specifically discussed in such a meeting have not even been formulated yet .... Russian President Putin Wants To Meet President Trump In Slovenia (February 10, 2017). This in itself is new .... past meetings with U.S. and Russian Presidents were always discussed and choreographed waaayyyy before the leaders met .... but with Trump we are seeing something that is rare .... Putin is willing (and eager) to throw out protocol. He is doing a "Hail Mary" pass .... and if I was an adviser to President Trump, I would be telling him that he should take it .... after-all .... and quoting President Trump before the election when he was campaigning for the "Black vote" .... what can you lose.
5 comments:
There are great changes coming in ME alignments and actions.
James,
This is quite correct that there are tremendous changes coming in ME alignments and actions. In order for the United States to fully benefit from this, better relations with Russia are simply a must. Unfortunately some seem hell-bent on undermining attempts to improve our relations with this very important for NO GOOD REASON!!
Ukraine? A net liability to us, why would any one want to risk American lives, economic, and security interests for that corrupt government?
Eastern Europe, the Baltics, etc? A net liability as well to us, no good reason to risk American economic or security interests for these users and abusers of us any more than there is to risk American interests for Ukraine. Essentially this is an extremely costly and risky endeavor that offers us little to nothing in terms of positive benefit.
Furthermore as part of the negotiated end to Cold War I the Russians thought they had an agreement that the US/NATO would not expand into Eastern Europe. Whether or not such an agreement existed I do not know. In any event, that is irrelevant now. The Russians thought they had such an agreement and are not going to be convinced otherwise. Furthermore, in light of the history between Russia and these nations, it would not seem an unreasonable request or expectation on the part of the Russians.
It's a pity for both America and Russia they did not get this in writing. Had they have done so we all might have been spared a great deal of trouble. I hypothesize that they did not get this in writing because the rhetoric going into negotiations was rather heated. When it came time to negotiate the parties were respectful to one another. After calling the Soviet Union and "evil empire", Ronald Reagan and his team needed to be allowed a face saving way to step down from this. As such, why make humiliate him further by having his sign an agreement that limits America's movement. Additionally, there would have been no reason for NATO/America to put a military presence in these areas anyway. Who knew we would get absolute idiots running things at a later date?!!?
Syria? As I patiently pointed out at the beginning of the Civil War in 2011, Assad cannot be removed. The Russians simply will not allow it. Any attempts to interfere in a way that undermines the Russians will be met with extreme prejudice on the part of the Russians and cannot succeed. As such, why engage in activities that cannot succeed and will only anger Russia? To add insult to stupidity, no American interests are served by supporting the so called "rebels."
Iran? We really could use Russia's help in dealing with this. Right now they are allied with Iran. Since we need their help here, it makes no sense to do anything the Russians would seem as antagonistic.
B,
Watch for Ankara, Moscow, and Washington alignments. The coordination of the first three in a project to reduce or eliminate Iran's presence in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, in that order.
B,
Oh yes, before I forget. If I were Mr. Gulen and Mr. Snowden at the moment, I would be very concerned about the future of my head.
James,
I think you are right about this. There seem to be allot of events lately along these lines that I would hypothesize that they fit together in the way you suggest.
As for Mr. Snowden, he's got to be cursing the day HRC lost the election. When he first did his deed and fled to Russia presumably to live like a king and a hero to Russia, he was praised to high heaven by much of the media and developed such a large following that he could have easily come back to the United States and been greeted as a hero and avoided arrest of any kind. Why give up the lavish lifestyle he no doubt thought.
Then HRC loses the election and the Democrats need a scapegoat!! Trot out Russia and Vladimir Putin even though no evidence has been presented to support such a claim. I'm getting off topic. Now Russia is out of favor with American elites. If he's sent back to the United States, his supporters can't now rally around him without looking even stupider than they already do. After all the time they've spent demonizing Russia, this would be problematic for them at best.
With that said we can't have a trial and American personnel can't be seen in an extradition. Even today high profile attorneys from the US and from around the world would flock to Snowden's case. Also, Russia has numerous friends in the world media. As such, to extradite Mr. Snowden and try him would be a circus that we frankly don't need. For American personnel to assainate him is to risky. American personnel generally don't have the kind of competence necessary to carry out this type of operation in a foreign country and the possibility of leaks makes the whole thing to risky.
As such, I would expect Russian personnel to do the deed. This would be done in exchange for any number of concessions we might make. As has been pointed out elsewhere, his flamboyancy has got to be p!ssing off even the Russians. Or Snowden problem gets solved, we are far enough away from it so as not to be linked, since the Democrats and the media did a 180 and made Russia an enemy, fleeing to the enemy does not bode well for one's resume' these days and gets them no sympathy, and Russia gets something for the efforts. His usefulness to all sides is over and combined with his flamboyancy means his life is very likely over as well. Had he done the deed and simply retired quietly to live a luxurious life in Russia he may have been allowed to live out his days.
As for Mr. Gulen, he's the guy ill famed of the Turkish coup right? Anytime one is seen as being in charge of a coup and a horribly incompetent one at that that fails, one should not expect to have a very long lifespan following such an action.
Post a Comment