StormWarning’s Counterterrorism

I started writing this post a few days ago before "my day job" created its own furor. One man’s perception is another’s reality. It is thus difficult for me to accept a blanket statement by President Bush that "the cold war is over" considering the continuing rhetoric spewed by Vladimir Putin. Saying that "we don’t believe in a zero sum world," President Bush was on his way to the G8 meeting where he would have a meeting with Vladimir (because George calls him Vladimir).

I don’t know what or who were are trying to fool, but no cold war? Putin is taking back to his old ways (are former KGB agents really ever former?)…Putin continues to react to the U.S. Missile Defense System installed in Europe, and the President tells him that "we are not enemies."

UPDATE: Anyone who thinks that presenting alternatives or making concessions at the G8 conference lessens the rhetoric or makes the possiblity of the emergence of a new Cold War should only read this headline: Putin Says U.S. Must `Hurry’ on Missile-Shield Offer (Update1). Thta’s not conciliatory language by any stretch.

"The U.S. should accept my proposal,” the Russian president said today, speaking in German. "They have to hurry up with their decision, I’m not giving them much time.” A spokeswoman for the U.S. Embassy in Moscow couldn’t be reached for comment immediately.

Putin, nine months from leaving office, made the offer to President George W. Bush at the Group of Eight Summit in Heiligendamm, Germany, on June 7. The Russian proposal counters a U.S. plan to build missile-shield facilities in Poland and the Czech Republic. The U.S. says it needs the anti-missile system to protect Europe from attacks by "rogue states” such as Iran.

Putin’s comments today were "a reaction to the rather cool response in Washington to his Azerbaijan proposal,” said Yevgeny Volk, a political analyst in Moscow with the Heritage Foundation, by telephone.

While I wouldn’t be the one to trust anything that Putin promises, I would also not want to be the one who doesn’t trust what he says. I don’t think that his are idle words. In one way, this may well be one of President Bush’s legacies.
Well, even in Real Clear Politics there was an article, missed by me for busienss reasons, Getting the Cold War Back Again in which David Warren wrote:

On the eve, yesterday, of the G8 meeting at Heiligenndam, the latter did not seek to appease the former with the usual soft and distracting words, but instead pointed to the obvious. President Putin’s threat to aim new missiles at Europe and America, in retaliation for the U.S. developing missile-shield technology, is not reasonable. There is nothing subtle about this. A missile-shield is defensive, multiple-warhead missiles are offensive. It can’t be put simpler than that.

Perhaps so, but I seem to remember having written two posts back in February, Cold War? What Cold War? (February 21, 2007):

Just what is happening in Russia these days, and why is it that Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, clearly a very intelligent and qualified person, can actually state "I have a difficult time explaining that speech. It doesn’t accord with either the world as we see it nor with the character of our interactions with the Russians." Something just doesn’t make sense, and I believe that it goes beyond the subtlety of Anne Applebaum’s article in the Washington Post, Our Strange Devotion to the Kremlin.

and The Second Coming - Cold War II (February 20, 2007):

Not unnoticed in some circles was the bombast of Vladimir Putin’s speech last week denouncing the U.S. as "overstepping its boundaries" worldwide. The question being posed, dear readers, is whether this White House understands the implications of Putin’s outspokenness.

I don’t work for the government, so who is missing the mark here? Who the hell are we trying to fool? So Putin has offered a counter-alternative…sharing a radar in Azerbaijan that would make it unnecessary for the U.S. to build a missile shield in Eastern Europe.

"This (Russian) proposal makes (U.S. missile shield) plans unnecessary," Lavrov told journalists, rejecting at the same time an idea that Moscow could take part in the U.S. missile shield system.

"To suppose that we will take part in building such a potential which … creates a threat to us is wishful thinking."

An opinion piece in Blog Critics offers that the U.S. v Russia issues here may stem from our ability to control Afghanistan (I don’t think we have Afghanistan under control) where Russia clearly failed. However, what we have here is the beginning of the next arms race. It may be subtle to some. It may turn out to be a high-tech cold war, but it is a new cold war nonetheless. There are so many other things that I could write about my opinions on diplomatic and strategic blunders…this may be another one with long-term implications.

This is also discussed in Zbigniew Brzezinski’s Time Magazine article, How to Avoid a New Cold War and with counterpoint on the Austin Bay Blog, UPDATED: The end of Putin’s anti-missile tantrum — and thoughts on Russia’s real dilemmas.