Stats
-
-
Oct
7
The Candidates Talk Russia, Round Two
October 7, 2008 |
Obama, "Russia sucks." McCain, "I agree."
Russia was a topic at the second Presidential debate after an absence at last week’s Veep debate. Both candidates pretty much repeated what they said two weeks ago with little variation. McCain repeated is famous quip, ” I said I looked into [Putin] eyes and saw three letters, a K, a G and a B.” Both wagged their finger at Russia’s bad, aggressive behavior. Both pledged moral support for Ukraine, Georgia, Poland, Latvia, and Estonia. Both denied a new Cold War was in the making at the same time both agreed that Russia was a challenge for the next US President. Obama even dared to say that holding Russia back was about “keeping all of [us] safe.”
Then Tom Brokaw threw this one out: “This requires only a yes or a no. Ronald Reagan famously said that the Soviet Union was the evil empire. Do you think that Russia under Vladimir Putin is an evil empire?“
Oh no. Brokaw went old school. Bringing out the big E-word. Of course neither Obama or McCain answered with a simple “yes” or “no,” though latter did give a terse “Maybe” before explaining himself. McCain even suggested that confronting Russia was part of the global resource wars. I appreciate his candor that the US interest is in energy and not some democracy gobbledygook.
Here’s what they said:
OBAMA: I think they’ve engaged in an evil behavior and I think that it is important that we understand they’re not the old Soviet Union but they still have nationalist impulses that I think are very dangerous.
BROKAW: Sen. McCain?
MCCAIN: Maybe.
BROKAW: Maybe.
MCCAIN: Depends on how we respond to Russia and it depends on a lot of things. If I say yes, then that means that we’re reigniting the old Cold War. If I say no, it ignores their behavior.
Obviously energy is going to be a big, big factor. And Georgia and Ukraine are both major gateways of energy into Europe. And that’s one of the reasons why it’s in our interest.
But the Russians, I think we can deal with them but they’ve got to understand that they’re facing a very firm and determined United States of America that will defend our interests and that of other countries in the world.
Evil behavior without being evil in essence. Sounds like Cold War rhetoric without the Cold War. All the fun without the calories! Does this mean we are in some kind of Diet Cold War?
Popularity: 5% [?]
Comments
68 Comments so far
-
Subscribe
RIA Novosti- Global Voices: Russia
-
-
Sean, I admire your fortitude. I watched the first twenty minutes or so. What an incredibly boring spectacle! They kept on repeating what they already said hundreds of times.
As to their words about Russia (which I missed), they were both playing to the voters and Russia now is back to being the bad guy. The same as the US is in Russia.
Judging from the comments in the blogs and other sites I just visited, this debate changed no minds.
The debates are boring but the it will a nasty month of campaigning.
Just for the record, Obama said two times that Russia is getting rich at the expense of US. Not once, but twice.
McCain criticism revolved around Putin and his curtailing of freedoms in Russia, and threatening neighboring countries. Obama basically said that Russians are getting richer by selling oil and that has to stop, twice. If that doesn’t prove his Marxist background, I don’t know what does.
Apparently for Obama there is always somebody exploiting exploiting somebody else, so now it’s Russia oily-garchs exploiting hard-working Americans. So what’s he gonna do, tax’em? Or boycot’em?
And what about all those nascent Russian social programs? They would certainly fizzle without surplus oil revenues. Does Obama realize he’s threatening to starve Russian orphans?
Like I always said, Republicans may be venal, but Democrats are insane.
Kolya, don’t think that I actually watched the debate. I saw 20 minutes and turned it off. I just checked the transcript for any substantive mention of Russia.
Oh I should also say that I don’t give myself that much TV time to waste. Tonight is 90210 night and well, hey, I have priorities!
What a lot of silly bluster for a country with rather limited foreign influence at present.
“As to their words about Russia (which I missed), they were both playing to the voters and Russia now is back to being the bad guy.”
Playing to relatively small groups of voters, in fact.
to the previous commenter: Russia has a sizable surplus at the moment - a revenue which does not wish to spend at home at once because of the inflationary consideration (it may even use some of it for a rescue loan to Iceland).
The single question about Russia was quite marginal in the debate (most of the attention went to the domestic economic problems). What bothered me though was a complete lack of acknowledgement, from both candidates, of the fact that Georgia was one of the beligerant parties in this conflict, and that Georgians attacked first - acting on a prepared plan. Shelling a civilian urban population with artilery fire without warning, and this all happened with a not-so-subtle US backing. It was mentioned like the latest example of Russia becoming dangerous.
You hear these catch phrases here in the news - KGB collonel - russian bear - oligarchs - lack of democracy, the labels that rather obscure what is going on with the US policy and Russia.
“Shelling a civilian urban population with artilery fire without warning,”
During a ceasefire no less!
I know this is a hard truth for the democracy fetishists among us, but in a system such as the US people do not get elected by providing analysis or nuance. They are not the Pope. They get elected by pandering and by providing cool-sounding catchphrases. What Obama and McCain say in public indicates nothing — absolutely nothing — of what they actually think.
Russia is not an evil empire, it is a desperate empire. Because of this, Russia is potentially far more dangerous and unpredictable than the Soviet Union was in a previous era. Russia has some temporary strength from its oil revenues, but the long term outlook is not good, as a reading of Murray Feshbach’s recent article in the Washington Post clearly shows.
Russian leaders are desperate to regain Russia’s earlier position as the world’s second superpower, and to regain world respect and attention. When they are not taken seriously, they are petulant and resentful, and prone to take risky actions. Hopefully, the next Administration will give Russia the attention it deserves, and do what it can to get our relationship back on a firmer footing.
“They get elected by pandering and by providing cool-sounding catchphrases. What Obama and McCain say in public indicates nothing — absolutely nothing — of what they actually think.”
Chris, you overstate your case. From their own words and political careers, we can get a sense, albeit only in general terms, where each candidate stands on many of the issues. I agree that it’s silly to try to find much substance in the words said during a televised presidential debate. It is indeed foolish to believe that a candidate will implement the changes he promises. It has never happened, reality always intrudes. It’s too bad US electoral campaigns are not briefer and less prostituting. Also, one of the unfortunate aspects of truly contested mass elections is that candidates, in order to win, have to cater to the lowest common denominator. Nonetheless, we can indeed discern real differences between the candidates.
Despite all its faults, I still think that Churchill had it right about democracy.
“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”
He also famously said:
“The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.”
And, to finish, here is a great one about politicians and politics:
“Politics is the ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month and next year. And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen.”
(I’m aware that many moons ago I used the quotes above–I believe in recycling.)
“Despite all its faults, I still think that Churchill had it right about democracy.
“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.””
I’m not making a value judgment, just pointing out the reality of the matter. Really existing democracy, when you get down to it, is more a mechanism for conflict resolution (mostly between elites) than it is the rule of the People. The People do not know enough, and are too easily manipulated, for it to function in the way it was envisioned.
(I think Churchill’s comment is more pithy than it is insightful, like much British wisdom
, but that’s neither here nor there.)
“as a reading of Murray Feshbach’s recent article in the Washington Post clearly shows.”
I was really disappointed by both candidates’ comments on Russia - though likely for different reasons.
For one, why does McCain insist on repeating that same lame line? For a guy who claims to know the country so much better than his opponent (even if he openly despises Putin), then why can’t he ever provide us with some more insight other than that KGB crap?
Obama looked like a deer in headlights when Russia came up, and quickly tried to move the discussion back toward Bin Laden where he felt cozy. I also think that Brokaw bringing in Russia was exactly the moment in which McCain finally relaxed a little bit and hit his stride toward his polished finish.
I kept waiting for Obama to get smart and outright ask McCain to explain why he was celebrating his birthday on Deripaska’s yacht, or hammer away at some of that Robert Kagan “league of nations” BS. A wasted opportunity.
This election narrative of Russia’s “behaviors” instead of interests is sickeningly paternalistic.
Chris, from what I remember (rather fuzzily) the so-called American Founding Fathers didn’t have an idealized view of the masses. When they invoked the People it was like a sort of construct.
I like all those Churchill’s quotes. Although I’m no political scientist I think that first quote about democracy is spot on precisely because it acknowledges its imperfect and messy nature.
Much of the US political system is based (at least ostensibly) on long-dead political philosophers. I wonder what relevant insights science has about mass psychology that can make democracy more effective. Politicians obviously try to use mass psychology to their advantage, but that’s not what I’m having in mind. I’m not referring to how to manipulate masses, but the reverse. How to use what science knows about social and mass behavior to make democracy more effective and less prone to manipulation. Not that I expect that politicians will push to implement changes to accommodate such scientific insights, but it’s an interesting question nevertheless.
I still find it fascinating that the IQ of a mass of people seems to be lower than the average IQ of the individuals that compose it.
Kolya. The problem is that none of candidates could show where he was standing with Putin. SO it’s impossible to get a sense where they will stand on. Except from their own words.
But I think McCain has better position in respect to Russia. At least he knows well that Russian SA missiles were damn good and he must be very careful
PS. Looks like you have less trust in democracy than I do
Ivanov, I frankly don’t pay attention to what they say about Russia. The election will be decided on domestic issues.
“Looks like you have less trust in democracy than I do”
I got the impression (perhaps wrongly) that you disdain democracy. I don’t disdain it. I think it’s a very imperfect and messy system that can be improved. But, of all the systems we had and now have in the world, I don’t see anything that I would prefer. (By democracy I mean “liberal democracy”–as commonly understood.) I’m open minded, though: if there are any viable alternatives that offer the same amount (or more) of freedom and prosperity, I would love to learn about them.
“Chris, from what I remember (rather fuzzily) the so-called American Founding Fathers didn’t have an idealized view of the masses. When they invoked the People it was like a sort of construct.”
They actually excluded the masses, didn’t they? It was supposed to be kind of a debating club for rich (and educated) people, sort of like ancient Athens and pre-Imperial Rome.
It’s not apparent that any of the candidates (for President or VP) or the journalists asking the questions are aware that Medvedev is the current President of Russia. Even if you argue that Putin is still the one with the most power, who do the candidates go after when speaking of Iran? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Even though he’s not the one with the most power. It’s very odd to me. Isn’t it basic diplomatic protocol to acknowledge the existence of a country’s official leader, even if you suspect they are not in control?
It’s not apparent that any of the candidates (for President or VP) or the journalists asking the questions are aware that Medvedev is the current President of Russia. Even if you argue that Putin is still the one with the most power, who do the candidates go after when speaking of Iran? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Even though he’s not the one with the most power. It’s very odd to me. Isn’t it basic diplomatic protocol to acknowledge the existence of a country’s official leader, even if you suspect they are not in control?
==============================================
Poemless,
You are right on the spot. The issue of me being bullied in this way is so outrageous that I even had to address it on my blog:
http://thepresidentofrussia.blogspot.com/2008/09/russian-president-is-being-bullied-by.html
P.S.: Anti-spam word: connect
More generally, how can you, guy, watch these “debates”? Do they really matter? Better read this:
“People in the United States and the Soviet Union have had broadly similar
attitudes toward politics. In the US, this is often referred to as “voter
apathy”, but it might be more accurately described as non-voter
indifference. The Soviet Union had a single, entrenched, systematically
corrupt political party, which held a monopoly on power. The US has two
entrenched, systematically corrupt political parties, whose positions are
often indistinguishable and which together hold a monopoly on power. In
either case, there is, or was, a single governing elite, but in the United
States it organized itself into opposing teams to make its stranglehold on
power seem more sportsmanlike.
In the US, there is an industry of political commentators and pundits
which is devoted to inflaming political passions as much as possible,
especially before elections. This is similar to what sport writers, and
commentators do to draw attention to their game. It seems that the main
force behind political discourse in the US is boredom: one can chat about
the weather, one’s job, one’s mortgage and how it relates to current and
projected property values, cars and the traffic situation, sports, and,
far behind sports, politics. In an effort to make people pay attention,
most of the issues trotted out before the electorate pertain to
reproduction: abortion, birth control, stem cell research and similar
small bits of social policy are bandied about rather than settled, simply
because they get good ratings. “Boring” but vitally important strategic
issues such as sustainable development, environmental protection and
energy policy are studiously avoided.
Although people often bemoan political apathy as if it were a grave social
ill, it seems to me that this is just as it should be. Why should
essentially powerless people want to engage in a humiliating farce
designed to demonstrate the legitimacy of those who wield the power? In
Soviet-era Russia, intelligent people did their best to ignore the
Communists: paying attention to them, whether through criticism or praise,
would only serve to give them comfort and encouragement, making them feel
as if they mattered. Why should Americans want to act any differently with
regards to the Republicans and the Democrats? For love of donkeys and
elephants?”
Dmitry Orlov “Reinventing Collapse”, pp. 114-115
On the second debate, I like what Stanley Crouch wrote about it:
“As Obama and McCain went toe-to-toe in Nashville, you couldn’t help but think we’ve come a long way to get to a place this dull.”
Wow, Dima, way to show some leadership in the vacuum! I like your five-point plan:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601095&sid=afHrpdfDP6K0&refer=east_europe
And now you have Sarky as a pal. And everybody likes Carla, that’s good for your team too. He ‘tournez’s la veste’ pretty easily, however.
Tess, is that a Jacques Dutronc reference?
I think it goes all the way back to Charles-Emmanuel de Savoie (1562-1630). However, I picked it up watching “Les Guinolles” on TV while living in Paris decades ago….wonder if they still run that show during the news?
Tu habitais en France? Il y a longtemps je parlais francais presque courrament, mais maleheureusement je ne peux pas garder plus qu’une langue etrangere dans ma tete a la fois, et la russe l’a pousse de mes cerveux.
J’adore Dutronc. Ne savais pas que l’expression existait plus tot. Merci!
PS I’ll ask my parisienne roommate about the show.
Chris! If I was Sean I would say “В моем доме попрошу не выражаться!”
One thing about that article on Medvedev: Why do the authors lead us to the conclusion that he is referencing C.Rice when he says: “Sovietology, like paranoia, is a very dangerous disease. Part of the U.S. administration suffers from this disease.”? It’s so much bigger than her. Everyone whose first order of business is protecting the U.S. $700B military budget (and their slice of it) is embracing the fantasy of a zero-sum game with Russia. Both McCain and Obama seem to have that faction on their teams, so there is no escape when Condi leaves. Still I like to read Dima speaking up in the US press.
Sean is proud of his French heritage, Ivanov!
How is the Cuba of the North?
Wow, Dima, way to show some leadership in the vacuum! I like your five-point plan:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601095&sid=afHrpdfDP6K0&refer=east_europe
And now you have Sarky as a pal. And everybody likes Carla, that’s good for your team too. He ‘tournez’s la veste’ pretty easily, however.
——————————————-
Tess,
Yeah, the time is ripe for me to move in and take over … you know the stuff.
Apparently most of my colleagues in high places have no clue right now about what to do and no money either. It looks I’m the man (and Vladimir Vladimirovich too).
Chris! If I was Sean I would say “В моем доме попрошу не выражаться!”
————————————————
“А в соседнем районе, между прочим, - украли члена партии”(c)
Bonjour Chris! Moi aussi , d’entendre la langue francais me manque beaucoup. Mais c’est plus et plus difficile de parler et comprendre comme je suis toujours parmi les Russes qui insistent parler leur merde de langue. Je fais un grand effort de apprendre la Russe. Je comprends beaucoup et je peux lire en peu. Quel dammage qu’apres presque 15 ans de marriage, je ne reussis pas de parler mieux. Nos enfants parlent bien la Russe grace a ma belle-mere. Quand je dis “Ho shyat Pete stoney butt.” Ils disent “Maman, tais-toi. Vraiment ca vaux pas le peine.” Peut-etre si je travailles moins dans l’avenir proche a cause de le “2nd Great Depression” j’aurais le temps de vraiment apprendre la Russe et practicer le Francais. Ca me plaisirais beaucoup. NB: Quand j’habitais a Paris j’ai regarde “les Guinolles” et aussi ‘90210′ - ‘dubbed’ en francais. C’etais terrible!
What other languages do we have represented? so far I think we have English, Russian, German, French and Gaelic. What else?
We are preparing to defend our small democratic country from the threat of big old empire that use its financial superpower to bully small neighbours!
And some guys have started to grow bananas here! So we are practically have all needed strategic resources in place
“What other languages do we have represented? so far I think we have English, Russian, German, French and Gaelic. What else?”
Ivanov speaks Icelandic. I read Greek, if I have a dictionary handy.
Bunch of elitist snobs.
¿Qué otro idioma? Añade el español.
От сноба и слышу!
Bunch of elitist snobs.
От сноба и слышу!
———————————–
Действительно, - люди приписывают другим все свои качества.
Relax, Dima, it was a joke.
”Bunch of elitist snobs.”
Ta, cinnte. Ach nil mor Gaeilge agam, bron orm!
If only it were true Candide. The dogs and cats on the street of the Irish-speaking region I’m ensconsed in right now have more and better Irish than me!
These Irish lads get themselves out of a pickle on some foreign field with some hilarious pigeon Irish pretending its a poem. He says things like ”I like cake”, ”the clouds are in the sky” and at the end ”be quiet, sexy white girl”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNBmFveq2U
and the Chris Doss-recommended Aifric, 90210 Irish-style:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeFIUp0-RlQ
kak dela there in Iceland, ivanov? Do you need us all to chip in and send you a few Euros and dollars for the weekly shopping?:-)
kak dela there in Iceland, ivanov? Do you need us all to chip in and send you a few Euros and dollars for the weekly shopping?:-)
———————————————–
Irish,
Ivanov and other Vikings of Iceland need not to worry about their finances. Russia is going to offer a helping hand in the form of 4 billions of Euros. This is going to be the first ever purchase of another country for Russia. Definitely, much more effective and painless than sending tanks. Perhaps, Iceland would have to adopt a slightly different name, I’m thinking along the lines of Iclandschina or something like that. Any ideas?
Relax, Dima, it was a joke.
——————————————
Candide, I was kidding too. Kind of nervous right now though, - after watching what the markets have been doing all day.
P.S.: Anti-spam word: RENT
Reikyavikskaya Oblast
Reikyavikskaya Oblast
————————-
Right on, and the capital will be called “Rejkjaviksk”
”Definitely, much more effective and painless than sending tanks. ”
hahaha! lol! Priceless President Medvedev!:-)
I guess ivanov will fit right in with the new regime there.
”Kind of nervous right now though, - after watching what the markets have been doing all day. ”
Agreed. It is getting quite worrying.
”Definitely, much more effective and painless than sending tanks. ”
hahaha! lol! Priceless President Medvedev!:-)
I guess ivanov will fit right in with the new regime there.
”Kind of nervous right now though, - after watching what the markets have been doing all day. ”
Agreed. It is getting quite worrying.
———————————————
Right on - Ivanov is the 5th column so to say, he will be the new administration in Rejkjaviksk. Ivanov, do you have a Russian flag hidden somewhere?
visited shop tonight. I guess I was lucky - guys haven’t heard about krapatima* - shelves were full and prices were reasonable (in Icelandic way)…
krap = slush
tima = time
But I think it’s time to borrow a couple of Russian attack submarines. Britain is threatening small democratic neighbour again!
And here is the story about who is friend and who is not
http://sedlabanki.is/?PageID=287&NewsID=1890
sedlabanki = Central Bank
Were you poaching British cod fish again? Shame on you!
It is the Brits who are encroaching on the sacred Icelandic cod!
Icelandic is such a cool language: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6hGc7S8d88
(That is MUCH better than the English version of one of my favorite songs.)
”Bunch of elitist snobs.”
This from a guy who has taken the name of a character penned by a French philosopher of the Enlightenment period.
Should Dragon Lady Palin ever descend on SRB to hunt down and shoot the elitists, with that name, you, Candide, would be the first one she’d aim for. I don’t think she bothers to read stuff…so she wouldn’t figure out what a fan you really are from your posts. You’d be like a dead wolf left to rot in the shadow of her departing airplane. Oh whoops, she sold the airplane, but not on Craig’s list.
Il faut cultiver son jardin.
Voltaire was also an enemy of religion and the state — clearly a leftist and Marxist!
PS. the show with the puppets is still on in France.
”That is MUCH better than the English version of one of my favorite songs.)”
Thats a brilliant song alright sounds cool in Icelandic! She was a superstar here in Ireland when I was a student, everyone loved her.
”You’d be like a dead wolf left to rot in the shadow of her departing airplane.”
Just saw on tv that she officially abused her power in Alaska. Naughty girl. I’d forgive that bit of nepotism were it not for how thick she is. Her ridiculous comments about Russia being near Alaska and Putin ‘rearing his head’ were just cringe-inducing, I was embarrassed for her!
sorry, meant to say ‘reverse nepotism’.
Heads up! Dimitri Rogozin interviewed by Lyse Doucet of the BBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/programmes/the_interview.shtml
Download mp3:
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/interview/interview_20081010-2332a.mp3
All in all, quite interesting, though I share Roga’s disappointment about some of the questions and how they were framed.
1. I’d die for Sarah in a heartbeat and nothing you say can change that.
2. Voltaire was much closer to modern Libertarians than anything else.
3. Where is ‘ivanov’, fishing for cod?
Thanks Aleks. I’ll make a post of it sometime today.
“I’d die for Sarah in a heartbeat and nothing you say can change that.”
Feel free!
She won’t notice your death anyway. Better stay with us.
As to cod - I’m buying it at a store. But it’s Gordon Brown that used Terrorist Act to threaten Iceland over money lost by British idiots.
Could you imagine that NYPD keeps its budget fund in “internet bank” because “bank” promises to pay 15%? But that what many government agencies in UK did (google IceSave).
And now big old superpower threatening small democratic country!!! Iceland should borrow Kilo U-boats to sink a couple of British aircontainer carriers. And not allow British plane to enter Iceland airspace (need to borrow a wing of SU-27). If they want the war - they’ll get it. You know that vikings and Russians are same? And what could be more dangerous than drunk viking? Right - drunk Russian…
So if you hear in the news that British embassy burnt to the ground in Iceland - don’t be surprised.
Afram Island!!!
PS.
“In Cod we trust” (c) - as I read in Seattle.
1. I’d die for Sarah in a heartbeat and nothing you say can change that.
She won’t notice your death anyway. Better stay with us.
Totally agree with Ivanov here. I never took the time to say, Candide, that I too really appreciated the poetry in your rant about Chris. Your presence ensures that SRB is not Poemless.
If you want to change your SRB Name to something less elitist and that Sarah would like, but still French, might I suggest Jacques Brel. (Well he was actually Belgian.)Because that whole bit about the puddle in front of Putin’s toilet, or whatever, reminded me of the Brel song “Ne me quitter pas.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKMqCqjixyo
The part where he is willing to be “l’ombre de l’ombre de ton chien.” (the shadow in the shadow of your dog). Right there he captures how you feel about Sarah Palin. So I think the name would really fit.
“Reikyavikskaya Oblast”
I was going to call you out on stealing my “Cuba of the North” line, but you’ve redeemed yourself with this. LOL.
I never liked Brel very much for some reason.
Well you probably didn’t like being called a “drop in the splash next to Putin’s WC” either, or something close. But, like Brel, it was poetic/pathetic.
No, I don’t care what people say on the Internet.
Ne me quitte pas is OK, but Brel never really interested me.