The West Begins to Crack: U.S. Policy May Be Diplomatic Suicide, J.R. Nyquist, April 19, 1999

[kabud]

The West Begins to Crack: U.S. Policy May Be Diplomatic Suicide
J.R. Nyquist
April 19, 1999
http://web.archive.org/web/20000308173055/www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=1999/4/19/64222
With 80,000 Russians volunteering to fight NATO and 30,000 U.S.
reservists being called to active duty, Bill Clinton's leadership
continues to propel Europe toward war. But Europe may not follow
Clinton's lead to the bitter end.

European leaders are beginning to realize the depth of Russia's anger
and the potential consequences.

Consider the following formula: If you want bad relations, insult a
government. But if you want war, insult a nation. By assuming that
Russia cares more about IMF money than its own national dignity, the
Clinton Administration has offered a powerful insult to the Russian
people. As Clinton takes blatant advantage of Russia's economic
distress to wage war on Russia's ally, dislike for America has gone
from 28 percent in Russia to 72 percent. Reflecting this, politicians
from the mayor of Moscow on up to the President of the Russian
Federation have openly warned of a third world war.

Observing Russia's anger, taking note of Russian warnings, many in
Western Europe are beginning to wonder. Can they continue to follow a
NATO leader who openly advocates the violation of NATO's own charter,
who flouts international law, who treats a nuclear superpower with
galling contempt, and who casually breaks oft-repeated promises about
the "peaceableness" of NATO's eastward expansion?

The Russians have good reason to be furious. Clinton's words have not
matched his deeds. Two thirds of the Russian people expect NATO will
soon attack Russia. Trust and good will between the world's nuclear
superpowers has been effectively destroyed. Consequently, Russia is
making dangerous moves of its own. More than 30 vessels of Russia's
Black Sea Fleet have been mobilized for war exercises which are slated
to continue until 28 April, while units of the Ukrainian navy have
also put to sea. In fact, Russian naval units are presently engaged in
readiness exercises from Vladivostok to Murmansk.

On the Western side of the equation, after a disastrous week of
bombing, France has begun to distance itself from Washington,
suggesting it is too risky to confront Russia with total war. At the
same time Germany begins to play the role of middleman between
Washington and Moscow.

Are Europe's continental powers beginning to mark out a more equivocal
position, hoping to avoid the destruction that a widened war might
bring? Is the United States rushing headlong into diplomatic suicide
and the breakup of NATO?

As the situation in the Balkans continues to deteriorate, France and
Germany are bound to be the first countries to feel the heat. The
French remember that it was Russia that defeated Napoleon, and the
Germans know it was Russia that defeated Hitler. If Europe's greatest
war leaders could not stand against the ever "backward" Russians, who
can safely take them on today? Is Clinton respected as a military
genius? Are we to rank him with Roosevelt or Churchill, as he bites
his lower lip -- feeling the world's pain?

The Russians are a proud people, not nearly as comfortable or
compromising as those in the West. Russians have always been more
ready to sacrifice themselves in war. This truth was first observed by
Frederick the Great over two hundred years ago. Sadly, this truth has
been lost on Bill Clinton.

As Russia's war preparations continue, the significance of French and
German diplomacy cannot be overstated. Should America press forward
without French or German support, she will lose her position in Europe
altogether. If this should happen, Moscow would win a great diplomatic
victory. And the victory would likely prove the first episode in a
renewed Cold War -- a Cold War that would begin with a Russian proxy
controlling the strategic minerals of South Africa and the Cape sea
route to the Middle East oil. (South African President Nelson Mandela
has already declared which side his country will choose -- the Russian
side.)

But the consequences of Clinton's Balkan campaign have yet to be
considered by U.S. officials. In Washington they are acting as if
Russia no longer matters. But in reality it is Washington that might
cease to matter. In fact, if Yeltsin's threat of World War III bears
out, Washington might even cease to exist.

Whatever one may say about the French, at least they have the sense to
be afraid of what Russia's nuclear arsenal can do. But General Wesley
Clark of NATO is not afraid. He recently summed up the American
position when he said: "We're going to continue with the mission
exactly as planned regardless of political and diplomatic
atmospherics."

In Clark's view Russian war preparations are mere "atmospherics." In
this instance, the disregard equals disrespect. Sadly, it is America
that has forgotten its good manners. It is America that does not
realize the military weakness into which it has fallen. It was only
last October that the Pentagon itself complained about the deplorable
state of the nation's military. Now we are to believe something quite
the opposite -- that we are the world's only superpower.

If U.S. policy in the Balkans is not military suicide, it may yet
prove to be diplomatic suicide.