Poland's Sikorski: Russia would lose confrontation with West

M&C ^ | Aug 27, 2008

[lizol]

Poland's Sikorski: Russia would lose confrontation with West (Roundup)

Europe News

Aug 27, 2008, 13:03 GMT

Warsaw - Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski said in an interview Wednesday he would prefer Russia to work with the West and that Moscow would lose again if it came to confrontation.

'As Europe, we're 10 times richer than Russia and along with the United States 20 times,' Sikorski told the daily Dziennik. 'I'd prefer if Russia worked together and integrated itself with the wider-known West, but if it comes to confrontation, then it will lose again.'

Sikorski's comments came a day after Russian President Dmitry Medvedev formally recognized Georgia's breakaway regions as independent, defying Western criticism. Earlier this month Abkhazia and South Ossetia fuelled a brief but bloody Russia-Georgia conflict.

Sikorski also reaffirmed Poland's support for Georgia's territorial integrity, saying an upcoming meeting of European Union leaders on the topic will be an 'important test' in its ability to conduct external politics.

Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk is slated to attend the September 1 EU summit on Georgia and will meet with Polish President Lech Kaczynski before the gathering. A top aide to the prime minister said 'it would be good' to unify their different viewpoints, reported the Polish Press Agency (PAP).

Kaczynski also plans to attend Monday's summit, the president's office told PAP, saying Kaczynski's presence there was 'essential' because of his involvement with the Georgia issue.

Kaczynski has come out strongly in support of Georgia and harshly condemned Russia for 'imperialism,' while Tusk has been more diplomatic, supporting a French-Russian plan to resolve the conflict.

The United States slammed Medvedev's recognition of the breakaway territories, while the European Union reaffirmed support for Georgia's territorial integrity.

Medvedev stressed that Russia has long held back from recognizing the regions' pleas for independence, but Georgia's attack on South Ossetia had forced its hand.

The EU and the entire West will find ways to work with Russia, Sikorski said, and Polish-Russian diplomacy is still possible.

'Heads of France, Germany, the US, Turkey and Ukraine have been in Russia,' Sikorski told Dziennik. 'Poland shouldn't be the only nation that doesn't speak with its neighbour. I think that Russia should also care for dialogue with a nation that's now listened to on Eastern matters more carefully than ever before.'

[webrover]

And Europe would gladly let us. I don’t think an American leader would resort to a shooting war with Russia. Unless they actually nuked us. And even then I think some would hesitate. That’s just a single opinion, though.

[lizol]

Don’t think so.

[Clemenza]

Antiquated ships and weaponry, not the healthiest looking soldiers, top-heavy bureaucractic military management, etc. Russia would indeed lose provided the western nations (and the natives of Georgia, Ukraine, etc.) did not go in half-assedly with a "police action."

Russians tend to speak loudly and carry a limp d--k. For much of their history, they truly have been a weak nation masquerading as a world power.

[Daveinyork]

“It’s all about will. And old Europe has none”

does the US have enough will?

[webrover]

For a shooting war with Russia? Wise discernment is more important than will. Do our leaders have that? We'll see.

[webrover]

It’s more about will with the Europeans because of their proximity to the area. For us it’s more about wise discernment as to whether to involve ourselves. And to what degree?

[EyeGuy]

“...I still wouldn’t count on the Western Europeans standing together with Poland on anything.”

---

I wouldn’t count on the narcisstic European socialists to stand for anything except wardrobe choices, restaurant selection, and travel plans.....

[wolf78]

I don’t know what the President of Poland knows, but I still wouldn’t count on the Western Europeans standing together with Poland on anything.

On the other hand, the US has always stood with Poland, just like in 1945.... ah, well - not.

But I actually think that Sikorski is referring to another "cold war" instead of an actual military (or even nuclear) confrontation. That's why he's referring to "Europe is 10 times richer". And he's right. Russia needs e.g. German tunnel boring machines (TBMs) etc. to rebuild it's infrastructure. Russia would suffer more from isolation than Europe would from interruptions in energy supply. After all, if Russia ceased its oil production, it would go broke and if it re-routed its oil flow to China, that would free up capacities elsewhere. Disruptions would last a few years, at most, Russia's inevitable decline for decades.

[Always Independent]

The Russians don’t believe in prestige by deeds. Their path to prestige lies in fear. They need to see the light.

[Pan_Yan]

Russia would suffer more from isolation than Europe would from interruptions in energy supply.

I think your conclusion is correct. However, the Russians have shown a willingness to cut off oil to pressure other countries, and Europe has not shown the willingness to stand up to anyone.

Poland gets 95% of its oil from Russia. If the tap gets shut off prices around the world would likely skyrocket. The appeasement crowd in Western Europe would probably fold like a house of cards.

The Democrats would have a golden opportunity to control both houses of Congress with a filibuster proof majority and the White House.

Hopefully, President Bush can find the right button to push to make them blink. I'm afraid that France, Germany and the like would be perfectly willing to let Georgia, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Ukraine, maybe even a Balkin state of two go to maintain the status quo with a resurgent Russia.

[Pan_Yan]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2069408/posts

“Even the European Union, which is to hold a summit next month, has downgraded its most likely response to the Russian military presence in Georgia from deploying peacekeepers to sending observers.”

But would the Europeans fight? They don’t seem that eager to toe the line.

[colorado tanker]

The fact is no one is going to send combat troops to Georgia. It's indefensible in reality as the country does not adjoin any NATO country and there are no major NATO bases nearby. To be blunt, it's not worth getting into a shooting war over. Our options are sanctions and diplomacy.

As to an attack on Poland, yes I believe the Europeans would fight. My opinion of the Russian Army is no better than my opinion of the old Red Army. The Poles could probably defeat them on their own, but in combination with us they surely would.

How much would other countries contribute? As usual, the Brits would be there. I'm not sure the others could do much as they've drawn down their militaries so much since the Cold War.

[Pan_Yan]

To be blunt, it's not worth getting into a shooting war over.

That's the rub, isn't it. How many fledgling democracies are we willing to give up to appease Russia? It really is the cold war all over again. Keep throwing others to the bear so he doesn't eat you.

I understand the political, military and economic reasons why we might back down, especially concidering our 'allies' on the european continent have shown no backbone against real threats.

But it doesn't stop me from feeling badly for the millions in countries that for the first time in generations had a chance to control their own destinies and now face the return of the iron fist.

[wolf78]

Poland gets 95% of its oil from Russia. If the tap gets shut off prices around the world would likely skyrocket. The appeasement crowd in Western Europe would probably fold like a house of cards.

That is true. However, in the past Russia only used the "oil / gas weapon", i.e. withholding supplies, for a limited amount of time and usually backed off, when countries like Ukraine etc. agreed to pay market prices. Right now Putin's / Medvedev's position is secure, because a Russian middle class can finally afford Chevy Aveos and shopping at IKEA Moscow. A full-blown economic confrontation would cause turmoil in Russia. That's why even the threat of EU sanctions (has the US threatened sanctions yet?) has led to some shrill shrieks in Russia.

So, a price spike, yes, but only temporary.

I'm afraid that France, Germany and the like would be perfectly willing to let Georgia, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Ukraine, maybe even a Balkin state of two go to maintain the status quo with a resurgent Russia.

Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia are not only members of the EU, but NATO also. Tanks crossing the border would mean for Russia to declare war on NATO.

So I believe colorado tanker is right when saying: As to an attack on Poland, yes I believe the Europeans would fight. My opinion of the Russian Army is no better than my opinion of the old Red Army. The Poles could probably defeat them on their own, but in combination with us they surely would.

[colorado tanker]

How many fledgling democracies are we willing to give up to appease Russia?

It's not the fact Georgia is a fledgling, IMHO, so much as Georgia's very unfortunate geography, which would make it very difficult for the West to defend it against Russia.

NATO is in a much better position to assist the Baltics, for example.

[colorado tanker]

Thanks, good points.

[wolf78]

NATO is in a much better position to assist the Baltics, for example.

Well, Georgia borders on Turkey, a NATO member, that also controls the entrance to the Black Sea (i.e. the Bosporus strait). That's also why already a number a NATO frigates are in the Region:


German Bremen class frigate "Lübeck"


Polish Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate "Generał Kazimierz Pułaski"


Spanish Álvaro de Bazán class frigate

and of course, the USS Tailor

[Pan_Yan]

Too many variables for a part timer like me to figure out all the angles. I puts my hopes in a president that has not backed down through eight difficult years and doesn't care one whit about opinion polls, here or in Europe. And he does have a Secretary of State who is an expert on Russia and has already said we will not let another iron curtain fall across Europe.

[colorado tanker]

True, Turkey shares a short border with Georgia. Turkey, however, had no appetite for getting involved militarily in the defense of Georgia.

Turkey's military in the region historically was defensively oriented to stop a Russian and later Soviet attack. I'm not aware of any NATO plans to use Turkey as a base to defend Georgia. Also, the naval force appears to be European.

Georgia is such a narrow country and so easily cut in two from S. Ossetia, it poses real problems for any NATO force that would try to intervene from distant bases.

[Camel Joe]

Of course we can’t just knuckle under either. If Vlad wants to play MAD well then, we’re his huckleberry I guess... We simply cannot let that threat stop us from doing what is right. Wouldn’t be prudent...