The two words “tactic” and “strategy” conjure up visions of military planners deciding on how to conduct a short battle or a full-length war.
In fact, it may be useful to
think in these terms; it may even be helpful to maintain that vision when we
feel compelled to use the language of combat to describe a purely civilian
situation that nevertheless contains elements of a fight. This may be social or
political combat but it often resembles a war-like situation.
A tactic is defined as an
action we take with the objective of securing a limited gain within a limited
time frame. By contrast, a strategy is a long-term plan that aims to achieve an
ultimate objective regardless of the temporary gains or losses we may incur in
the interim.
This brings us to ask if there
is utility in real life situations, for individuals to continually adopt a
tactical posture when dealing with friends, acquaintances and strangers, or
utility in adopting a strategic posture? Or is it better to treat each
situation according to its merit? We can even go beyond that, and ask if there
is utility for nations to permanently adopt one posture or the other when
dealing with other nations.
A recently published article
shows that human beings have a natural tendency toward the adoption of the
tactical mode of relationships when standing to represent their nation, and
interact with other nations. The title of the article is: “How Did EU-Russian
Relations Collapse and What Comes Next?” and the subtitle: “Moscow does not
want to end the few remaining ties with Brussels, but Russia does intend to
follow its longstanding strategy of circumventing the EU through bilateral
ties.” It was written by Mark Episkopos, and published on March 27, 2021 in The
National Interest”.
As can be seen, the title
alone speaks of Russia's desire to maintain a nuanced kind of tactical
relationship with the bloc of nations known as the European Union, while
developing a strategic kind of long-term relationships with the various nations
that make up the EU bloc. And there is more that's happening on both the
European and Asian continents. The following is a montage of the pertinent
passages in the Mark Episkopos article, that tell the story:
“Earlier this week, a German
official urged the European Commission to launch a joint Sputnik V procurement
that would allow member states to purchase the Russian vaccine through an
overarching EU contract. But even as Russia looks to partially salvage its ties
with Europe, it is also doubling down on its burgeoning partnership with China.
Beijing, too, is interested in brandishing its 'strategic partnership' with
Russia. Lavrov said in a recent interview with Chinese media that Moscow is
interested in forming a coalition of countries united against unilateral
sanctions”.
This brings us to ask the
following question: With all that’s happening in a region to which the center
of economic and military center of gravity has shifted, where does the United
States of America stands?
Before answering the question,
it is worth recalling that right after World War II, America was the darling of
everyone on Earth, including the foes it was fighting during the war. This
condition lasted for about two decades, and then America's reputation began to
slide down a slippery slope as if the country had suddenly become the “despised
Jew” in the eyes of the world. How did this happen?
It all began when America
stopped listening to its own voice, and listened instead to Winston Churchill
who inspired it to start the Cold War. America did so by getting into an
ill-advised adventure on the Korean Peninsula, and the rest is history. This
was followed by the fateful French advice that sent America to the humiliating
defeat the Vietnam war proved to be. And then came the antics that puzzled
the world at first, but then proved to be the American version of Judeo-Yiddish
trickery, characterized as being both cowardly and sly.
So, here was the America that
defended the underdogs when overwhelmed by aggressors, now over-arming Israel
while scheming to deprive the Palestinians of the means to defend themselves.
It also deprived them of maintaining ownership of the land that has been theirs
since the beginning of time, of a dignified life and of seeking justice at the
UN Security Council where the American veto has paralyzed the place, the way
that the Jews have paralyzed the American Congress.
Right now, what makes the
world see America as operating out of the Jewish sewer, are two approaches it
has adopted for its interactions with the world. On the tactical side, there is
the economic and financial sanctions it is imposing on anyone that dares to
stand up to it.
On the strategic side, there
is the drive to reject cooperating with other powers with the view of
maintaining parity of military strengths, thus keep the peace. Instead, America
has taken the Jewish advice of unleashing a never-ending arms race that can
only end in the dreaded Armageddon.
There is no way the United States can get
back to the standing it used to enjoy right after the Second World War. But it
can return to the habit of listening to its own voice by tuning out the
Judeo-Yiddish whispers of cowardly advice.