The one thing that identifies Clifford D. May’s style of writing is that he penetrates deep into the soul of those he dislikes, creates unlikely situations for them to wrestle with, and delights watching them perform under the worst possible of conditions.
When
done with the reveries, May takes pleasure describing those ugly performances —
moments of fiction he packages and presents to his readers as if they happened
in real life.
This is
what Clifford May did in his latest column. He wrote it under the title: “What
would happen if Putin were to prevail in Ukraine?” And had it published on June
20, 2023 in The Washington Times.
May
begins the article by giving himself the exclusive authority to do what he is
doing. He accomplishes this feat by starting the article with summarily
dismissing the opinions expressed by everyone else on the subject. Here is how
he did that: “Western leaders have long misunderstood Vladimir Putin.”
And here is the evidence he offered to prove his point:
“President George
W. Bush found him [Putin] to be very straightforward and trustworthy. Not
exactly. President Barack Obama predicted that Mr. Putin would not
get bogged down in a civil conflict in Syria. Later, Mr. Putin propped up
Bashar Assad. Angela Merkel believed that Mr. Putin’s ambitions would
drown in a river of euros. The chancellor was mistaken. After
Mr. Putin dismembered Georgia, American and European leaders went out
of their way not to provoke him. President Biden hoped Mr. Putin was
planning only a minor incursion into Ukraine. [Not so]”.
This
being the package of Clifford May’s total set of beliefs, how can he use it to
paint the image of a Putin that’s so horrible, people will change their minds,
hate the man, and be weary of him? Well, the way to do it, is for Clifford May
to dig deep into his own imagination and identify those moments when he
experienced the worst of sentiments as generated by extreme occurrences, and then
use the broadest of brushes to paint the picture of Vladimir Putin.
In fact,
Clifford May did just that, and the foray into the imagined journey prompted
him to ask what would Putin do next with regard to the critical issues which
are of interest to the West. And he answered the question by mentioning 5
countries that Putin will want to invade next so as to complete his plan and
restore to Russia the greatness it used to have but lost, and deserves to have
it back.
Those
countries are Moldova, Belarus, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, each of which
has a murky history according to Clifford May, and has various unresolved bones
of contention with Russia. But how would Putin begin action against those
countries without mobilizing the world,
especially the NATO countries, prompting them to say enough is enough, and move
forcefully to stop Putin?
In fact,
it is in response to this question that Clifford May demonstrated once more the
power of his imagination. What he did is write a scenario that Putin can follow
and pull off his plan. It goes as follows:
“Mr. Putin could say to NATO: ‘I’m open to
diplomacy — a land-for-peace deal. But if you’d rather wage war, you should
understand that extreme measures will be considered’”.
Now ask yourself: which NATO members would be willing to
risk a nuclear war with Russia over a ribbon of countryside in the southern
Baltics? Turkey? Germany? France? Would most Americans support such a conflict?
Clifford May’s prediction is that no one will try to stop
Putin. And this will have serious ramifications because “it’s tough to see how NATO could
survive if it failed to defend one of its members as pledged in Article 5 of
the North Atlantic Treaty.” And that’s not all because this will also mean the collapse of NATO
according to May who went on to explain that:
“For Mr.
Putin, NATO’s collapse would be a huge victory, one that his communist
allies in Beijing and Pyongyang, and his Islamist allies in Tehran would regard
as a significant battle won in their war against the West”. And in hose
capitals, the lesson learned will be that the US and Europe cave in to nuclear
blackmail.
There is more. May goes on to tell that two years ago,
Russian and Belarusian troops staged a military exercise to practice attacking
Lithuania. He guesses that perhaps you’ll say that, after the war
in Ukraine, Mr. Putin wouldn’t have the resources and manpower
necessary for such aggressions.
But Clifford May speculates that if Putin has been
successful, Tehran and Beijing would be as helpful as possible. The morale of
his troops would improve. And he’d have millions of Ukrainians whom he could
draft and — with bayonets pressed against their backs — use as cannon fodder.
This being an elaborate scenario, written in several acts
that describe enough twists and turns to dizzy the readers, we ask: Where did
Clifford May find the energy to put it all together?