New Dimensions of U.S. Foreign Policy Toward Russia

"The struggle for some of the most strategic territory in the world took an interesting twist this week. Last week we discussed what appeared to be a significant shift in German national strategy in which Berlin seemed to declare a new doctrine of increased assertiveness in the world -- a shift that followed intense German interest in Ukraine."

"This week, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, in a now-famous cell phone conversation, declared her strong contempt for the European Union and its weakness and counseled the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine to proceed quickly and without the Europeans to piece together a specific opposition coalition before the Russians saw what was happening and took action."

"This is a new twist not because it makes clear that the United States is not the only country intercepting phone calls, but because it puts U.S. policy in Ukraine in a new light and forces us to reconsider U.S. strategy toward Russia and Germany. Nuland's cell phone conversation is hardly definitive, but it is an additional indicator of American strategic thinking."

Mr Freidman, in addition to all his analysis, is highlighting what he refers to as a schism in American foreign policy. He uses the example of immediate, forceful and direct intervention in Libya, versus the less direct approach regarding Syria.

He tries in some way to project the kind of difference that example presents to other situations.

Without arguing for or against any specific policy choices, or what Friedman thinks of any of them, I think Mr Freidman may be glossing over a general policy choice that certainly can be no worse than the alternatives, and that general policy choice I am referring to is the consideration that one single approach may not be the best approach in every situation; that the full context of any situation should help shape a specific policy towards it; that a policy that moves in lock-step with "we will always do this" may not achieve results expected of it BECAUSE the context of the situation cannot be flexible to that approach; that, in some contexts it is less likely we can bend the contextual factors to a set policy approach in a situation and instead we might need to be flexible to what the context of a situation presents.

The Obama Administration has been an unmitigated foreign policy disaster for the United States.

Barack Obama is proud to tell us that he leads from behind...and while he is back there, he makes loud prognostications from his teleprompter and stumbles around with a twig in his hands...while whittling down, shaving large parts away from, and allowing the large stick he could otherwise hold to fester and rot.

(from the article):" .. (the)U.S. policy in Ukraine in a new light and forces us to reconsider U.S. strategy toward Russia and Germany.
Nuland's cell phone conversation is hardly definitive, but it is an additional indicator of American strategic thinking."

Any reconsideration of U.S. strategy would be an improvement over the previous amateurish strategy.
From one who already is acquainted with that strategy :
“Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon.
The pigeon knocks over all the pieces, —— (craps) on the board
and then struts around like it won the game.” --Vladimir Putin-2013

Mr. Freidman’s observations regarding Germany’s new assertiveness are interesting, but his analysis of the Russian-US dynamic falls flat.

American foreign policy these days more closely resembles black liberation theology than anything else.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.