The editors of the Wall Street Journal are whining because
something happened that caused them to believe President Obama lives in the
21st century and Putin in the 19th century when we should all be living in the
Stone Age. You get a sense of this if you know how to read between the lines of
the editorial they wrote under the title: “Welcome to the 19th Century” and the
subtitle: “Putin and the new Bonapartes see a weak and retreating West.” It was
published in the Journal on march 17, 2014.
They tell what happened that caused them to have their fit
at this time. It was something that John Kerry had said in response to what
they say Russia's Putin had done in Ukraine's Crimean peninsula. Kerry
basically said that while this is the 21st century, Russia behaved as if it
were the 19th century. And while the editors of the Journal don't like Putin's
19th century which reminds them of Napoleon Bonaparte, they like even less what
they call the fantasies of the 21st century where not only John Kerry lives but
also Barack Obama.
Before telling what it is they want to see done in response
to Putin's intervention in Crimea, the editors began to lay down the groundwork
they hoped will ultimately justify their conclusions. They wrote that Putin
consolidated his hold on the peninsula by forcing an illegitimate referendum. Russia also
vetoed a UN Security Council resolution denouncing the Crimean takeover.
Although they did not come out and say it, you could almost hear them curse:
Damn it, does he not know that only America has the right to veto resolutions
condemning Israel?
Still, this being insufficient to make a case against
Russia, they resort to the usual trick of speculating what that act will lead
to. Loath to mince with words, they put it bluntly: “Next up for conquest may
be eastern Ukraine.” They explain that Russian troops are massed on the border
and did, in fact, occupy a gas plant on the Ukrainian mainland. The editors now
stretch the speculation even further by relating that Russian agitators are
causing scuffles in several Ukrainian cities to provide Putin with a trumped up
pretext to intervene.
Believing that they have succeeded in making a case against
Putin and his Russia, they unleash a barrage of attacks against the barrier
that stands between them and their vision of an America that is as big as an
ogre standing like a fearless policeman watching over a world that dares not
defy it. What the editors do is badmouth President Obama and Europe
who, they claim, have done little but threaten “consequences' which they assure
the readers Putin will not take seriously.
The editors also attack what they call the “liberal
internationalists” who have arrived at the White House along with Mr. Obama.
They say this group proclaimed, upon arrival, that the policeman of the world
shall no longer be the American ogre but an arrangement for collective security
enforced by the international community. Of course, the editors have disdain
for all that, as they do for the new 21st century order whose rules will be
defined by international law and by treaties.
It is so far so good for the editors of the Wall Street
Journal because they feel they are getting close to telling what it is they
want to see done in response. But to make a point that will stand as solidly as
a rock, they must completely demolish the barrier that stands between them and
their vision. They see that possibility in the way that Messrs Obama and Kerry
have responded to the invasion of Crimea. It was to declare that “it is 'illegal'
because it violates 'the Ukrainian constitution and international law.'” And so they sneer: “As if Putin cares.”
And they proclaim in triumph that: “The 19th-century men
understand … political will and military power.” They go on to speak of revanchists
who are moving to fill the vacuum created by America's withdrawal. They name
such demons as Iran and Syria that threaten Israel; and such demi-demon as
China that is pressing its territorial claims. Now ready to pop the question,
they ask: “whether Mr. Obama and his advisers will push back.”
They feel they must tell how push-back should be done the
way they like it but they tried that before, and it was not well received by
their peers. And so they do it more diplomatically this time. They remind the
readers that they have written before about the need for economic and financial
sanctions against Russia and its elites. More of that can still be done, they
now say.
Finally, they move to describe their vision, but they do it
slowly, and one step at a time. Step one: “meet Putin's military aggression
with a military deterrent … Not strike Russia or invade Crimea … [but] offer
military aid to Ukraine.” Step two: “reinforce NATO to show Putin that invading
a treaty ally would lead to war.” Step three: “deploy forces to Poland, the
Baltic States and other front-line NATO nations.” Step four: “build a modern
missile defense installation in Easter Europe for use against Russian ICBMs.”
Step five, motivate the Europeans to participate with America in the
new arms race.
And that's what it's all about. Their vision is to start an
arms race that will make the Americans spend trillions of dollars developing
new advanced weapons that will never be used against a rival to America, but
will be there for Israel to use against its neighbors.