|
The U.S. “Blinked” Over Cuba … And “Blinks” Over Ukraine
Thomas Friedman continues to be the most dimwitted foreign policy commentator in U.S. media. Today he claims that Putin "blinked" on Ukraine by not invading it, something the Russian Federation never had any interest to do. But worse than such misreading of current foreign affairs events is Friedman's basic misreading of history. Thus his column today starts:
There was a moment at the height of the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962 when Soviet ships approached to within just a few miles of a U.S. naval blockade and then, at the last minute, turned back — prompting then-Secretary of State Dean Rusk to utter one of the most famous lines from the Cold War: “We’re eyeball to eyeball, and I think the other fellow just blinked.”
…
In the end, it was Putinism versus Obamaism, and I’d like to be the first on my block to declare that the “other fellow” — Putin — “just blinked.”
It was the United States that "blinked" in the Cuban Missile Crisis, not the Soviet Union. It was Kennedy who pulled back not Khrushchev.
In 1959/60 the U.S. planned and in 1961 proceeded to to install nuclear armed ballistic intermediate range missiles in Italy and Turkey. These "Jupiter" missiles could have reached Moscow within minutes and would have given the United States a decapitating first strike capability against the Soviet Union.
In April 1961 a CIA trained and supported force of exiles invaded Cuba. They were defeated and thrown out of Cuba but the incident intensified Cuban desire for protection by the Soviet Union.
Moscow initiated further talks with Cuba and an agreement was found to counter the U.S. missile threat in Europe by installing comparable missiles on Cuba.
The "Cuban Missile Crisis" ensued during which the Soviet Unions demanded the retraction of the Jupiter missiles in exchange for the retraction of its missiles from Cuba. It also demanded that the U.S. refrained from any further invasions of Cuba.
Kennedy "blinked" and agreed to those terms:
Later that night, Robert Kennedy meets secretly with Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin. They reach a basic understanding: the Soviet Union will withdraw the missiles from Cuba under United Nations supervision in exchange for an American pledge not to invade Cuba. In an additional secret understanding, the United States agrees to eventually remove the Jupiter missiles from Turkey.
With the Jupiter installations in Turkey and Italy the U.S. had gained an advantage. But the Soviet Union countered and in the end the U.S. pulled back. The Jupiter missiles were dismantled and Cuba was never again invaded. The U.S. sold out the interests of its allies Turkey and Italy while the Soviets delivered security assurances for their allies in Havanna.
The crisis in Ukraine, initiated by a U.S./EU instigated coup, is far from over but as of now the Russian Federation has already won a great price. The Crimea and the attached seas with hundreds of billions worth of hydrocarbon reserves are now (again) part of Russia. The Ukraine will continue to depend on Russia for its energy needs and general economic exchange. The United States will not give weapons to Ukraine or enough money to survive, nor will the EU. It will let the new Ukraine government hang as it grapples with its the coming energy crisis. Meanwhile Russia and China formed a new alliance. Medium to long term Russia will get its will in Ukraine and there is no way for the United States, apart from nuking Moscow, to change that perspective.
The Kennedy administration created the myth of the Cuban Missile Crisis – that it was the Soviets who blinked – to cover up its own retreat. Drawing on that false myth Friedman is creating another one. The new myth that Russia "blinked" over Ukraine. That Friedman finds it necessary to create such a new myth can only be explained by the need to cover up the ongoing U.S. retreat over Ukraine.
The guy who claimed that “pen is mightier than the sword” could not have been walking in a straight line. Only reason why a buffoon like Tom Friedman pushes his inverted line of persuasion is, he’s sheltered by the biggest killing machine the world has ever seen.
One way to push back at his po-faced dishonesty is with sarcasm lite.
Following is a `translated’ comment on blackandwhitecat.org (aug 28 2008). Parody followed by his original NYT column below.1. KEEPING UP WITH THE WONGS
There goes the ‘hood!
I WENT TO THE NEIGHBOUR’S HOUSE FOR A PARTY, AND GEE, WHAT A BASH THEY THREW!!
IT WAS GREAT, BUT WHEN I GOT BACK, I GOT TO THINKING: THEY SPENT A LOT OF MONEY AND WENT ALL OUT TO IMPRESS EVERYONE. BUT THEY WERE HIDING ALL THE COUNTRY COUSINS IN THE BASEMENT, AND SHOWING US ALL THE SHINY NEW STUFF.
SO WHAT? OUR FURNITURE IS A BIT FRAYED RIGHT NOW, BUT WE’VE GOT A GREAT HOUSE.
OUR NEIGHBOUR IS A SELFISH BULLY AND COWARD, ANYWAY.
WE PUT OUR BUTTS OUT TO PATROL THE GLOBAL NEIGHBOURHOOD, AND EVERYONE THROWS STONES AT US. OUR NEIGHBOUR STAYS HOME AND MISTREATS THEIR POOR RELATIVES.
OK, SO WE SHAKE DOWN THE WRONG FOLKS SOME TIME, AND BOMB SOME INNOCENT WOMEN AND CHILDREN HERE AND THERE.
I ADMIT I WAS TRIGGER-HAPPY, BUT SO WHAT?
AS BUSH’S DADDY SAID, AMERICA DOESN’T HAVE TO APOLOGISE.
BESIDES, THOSE IRAQI POLS ARE BUMS. THEY LOADED THEIR BOATS ON TOPS OF THEIR CARS AND TOOK OFF ON SUMMER VACATION. OUR BOYS ARE BURNING IN THAT DESERT HEAT TO UPHOLD AMERICAN VALUES THEIR PEOPLE ARE SO IN NEED OF. INGRATES!
IT’S TIME TO PULL OUT AND LET THEM STEW IN THE MESS WE CREATED. WE DON’T HAVE TO PICK UP.
WE HAVE TO PAINT OUR OWN PORCH AND MEND OUR FENCES. WE NEED TO KEEP UP WITH THE WONGS & CHONGS.
WE DON’T HAVE A BUSH OR A HENRY.
(THERE’S A HOLE IN MY BUCKET, DEAR HENRY, DEAR HENRY.)
BUT WE HAVE A BARACK!!
AND HE SAYS, NOW IS THE TIME TO PRETTIFY OUR OWN FRONT YARD RATHER THAN DESTROY SOMEONE ELSE’S. SMART GUY, BARACK!
AS FOR WHERE THE RENOVATION $$$ COMES FROM, DIDN’T THE HEDGE FUND BOYS JUST MAKE A PILE FROM PUSHING OIL PRICES TO ALL TIME HIGHS?
_____________________________________________
OLYMPICS AND CHINA’S RISE
A wake-up call for America
By Thomas L. Friedman
BEIJING: After attending the spectacular closing ceremony at the Beijing Olympics and feeling the vibrations from hundreds of Chinese drummers pulsating in my own chest, I was tempted to conclude two things: ‘Holy mackerel, the energy coming out of this country is unrivalled.’ And,
two: ‘We are so cooked. Start teaching your kids Mandarin.’
However, I’ve learnt over the years not to over-interpret any two-week event. Olympics don’t change history. They are mere snapshots – a country posing in its Sunday best for all the world to see. But, as snapshots go, the one China presented through the Olympics was enormously powerful – and it’s one that Americans need to reflect upon this election season.
China did not build the magnificent US$43 billion (S$61 billion)
infrastructure for these Games, or put on the unparalleled opening and closing ceremonies, simply by the dumb luck of discovering oil.
No, it was the culmination of seven years of national investment, planning, concentrated state power, national mobilisation and hard work.
Seven years…Seven years…Oh, that’s right. China was awarded these
Olympic Games on July 13, 2001 – just two months before 9/11.
As I sat in my seat at the Bird’s Nest, watching thousands of Chinese dancers, drummers, singers and acrobats on stilts perform their magic at the closing ceremony, I couldn’t help but reflect on how China and America have spent the last seven years: China has been preparing for the Olympics;
> we’ve been preparing for Al-Qaeda. They’ve been building better stadiums,subways, airports, roads and parks. And we’ve been building better metal detectors, armoured Humvees and pilotless drones.
The difference is starting to show. Just compare arriving at La Guardia’s dumpy terminal in New York City and driving through the crumbling infrastructure into Manhattan with arriving at Shanghai’s sleek airport and taking the magnetic levitation train, which uses electromagnetic propulsion
instead of steel wheels and tracks, to get to town in a blink.
Then ask yourself: Who is living in the Third World country?
Yes, if you drive an hour out of Beijing, you meet the vast dirt-poor Third World of China. But here’s what’s new: The rich parts of China, the modern parts of Beijing or Shanghai or Dalian, are now more state-of-the-art than rich America. The buildings are architecturally more interesting, the wireless networks more sophisticated, the roads and trains more efficient and nicer. And, I repeat, they did not get all this by discovering oil.
They got it by digging inside themselves.
I realise the differences: We were attacked on 9/11; they were not. We
have real enemies; theirs are small and mostly domestic. We had to respond to 9/11 at least by eliminating the Al-Qaeda base in Afghanistan and investing in tighter homeland security. They could avoid foreign entanglements.
Trying to build democracy in Iraq, though, which I supported, was a war of choice and is unlikely to ever produce anything equal to its huge price tag.
But the first rule of holes is that when you’re in one, stop digging.
When you see how much modern infrastructure has been built in China since 2001,
under the banner of the Olympics, and you see how much infrastructure has been postponed in America since 2001, under the banner of the war on terrorism, it’s clear that the next seven years need to be devoted to
nation-building in America.
We need to finish our business in Iraq and Afghanistan as quickly as possible, which is why it is a travesty that the Iraqi Parliament has gone on vacation while 130,000 US troops are standing guard. We can no longer afford to postpone our nation-building while Iraqis squabble over whether to do theirs.
A lot of people are now advising Senator Barack Obama to get dirty with Senator John McCain. Sure, fight fire with fire. That’s necessary, but it is not sufficient.
Mr Obama got this far because many voters projected onto him that he could be the leader of an American renewal. They know we need nation-building at home now – not in Iraq, not in Afghanistan, not in Georgia, but in America.
Mr Obama cannot lose that theme.
He cannot let Republicans make this election about who is tough enough
to stand up to Russia or Osama bin Laden. It has to be about who is strong
enough, focused enough, creative enough and unifying enough to get
Americans to rebuild America. The next president can have all the foreign affairs
experience in the world, but it will be useless, utterly useless, if we,
as a country, are weak.
Mr Obama is more right than he knows when he proclaims that this is ‘our’ moment, this is ‘our’ time. But it is our time to get back to work on the only home we have, our time for nation-building in America. I never want to tell my girls – and I’m sure Mr Obama feels the same about his – that they have to go to China to see the future.
Posted by: aMonymous | May 29 2014 15:47 utc | 104
|
