OLIVER NORTH
Posted on 08/16/2007 9:07:21 PM PDT by jazusamo
Friday, August 17, 2007
WASHINGTON -- The great horned owl is a magnificent raptor with feathers so soft its prey can't even hear it coming until it's too late. But even this superb hunter has a major challenge to overcome: It cannot move its eyes. To scan forest or field for danger -- or its next meal -- the owl, its eyes fixed straight ahead, must rotate its head. Today, the U.S. national security apparatus is much like an owl with a stiff neck.
For more than three years now, our White House, State Department and Pentagon have been fixated on America's adversaries in the Middle East and Southwest Asia. Our preoccupation has been on Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon and Gaza. Unfortunately, we seem to have missed what's happening in Russia. Not to carry the wildlife metaphor too far, but "the Bear" is back.
Last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that Moscow would build a new air defense radar system in St. Petersburg, to be "the first step in a large-scale program," and that it will be "carried out before 2015." This follows Putin's threat to re-target Russian nuclear weapons on Europe if Washington goes ahead with plans to deploy missile defense radars in the Czech Republic and anti-missile interceptors in Poland. As usual, the Blame America First crowd claims that the U.S. ICBM shield is precipitating a "crisis." Perhaps, but the Euro-critics and our own foreign policy wonks -- like owls that can't turn their heads -- may be missing what's really happening in Putin's world.
In July, the Russian president told newly promoted military and security officers at the Kremlin, "One of our absolute priorities is an all-round strengthening of the armed forces." Putin added, "Both the situation in the world and internal political interests demand that Russia's foreign intelligence service constantly increases its resources, above all in the field of information and analytical support for the country's leadership." And last week, Adm. Vladimir Masorin, Russia's navy chief, declared intentions to "restore a permanent naval presence in the Mediterranean Sea," a capability Moscow has not had since the Cold War.
But Moscow's new assertiveness isn't just talk. Sales of Russian military hardware to Iran, Syria, Venezuela and North Korea are up more than 25 percent in the past two years. A few weeks ago, Russian explorers planted a flag on the seabed at the north pole, "claiming" the region for Moscow -- despite angry protests from the U.S., Canada, Denmark and Norway. Last week, Pentagon officials acknowledged Moscow's boast that two Russian Tu-95 long-range turboprop bombers had "buzzed" U.S. military bases on Guam. And this week, Russia and China began a massive joint military exercise -- only the second ever, and it's the first to be held on Russian soil.
What's going on here? What's "the Bear" doing behind "the Owl's" back? Is Vladimir Putin bent on starting a new Cold War?
The fact is, we don't know. Our human intelligence resources are so thin that "we have no idea what's happening inside the Kremlin," according to one retired senior intelligence officer. But what we do know for certain should be alarming enough to make us pay attention.
First, we know that Russia is awash in gas and petrodollars. Thanks to the worldwide spike in oil and natural gas prices, Moscow is raking in euros and fueling military and intelligence expenditures that were previously financially impossible.
Second, we know that in the long term, Russia is in very serious trouble because it is simply running out of Russians. To sustain economic growth, a nation needs a growing population. Increasing the number of people requires either babies to be born in sufficient numbers or immigration -- or both. Moscow's problem is that it has neither. Even neutral population growth requires 2.1 live births per couple. Russia's birthrate is less than 1.6 -- and nobody immigrates to Russia.
According to the CIA, Russia also has one of the lowest average life spans on the planet: 66.6 years. Absent a dramatic increase in birthrate, longevity and/or massive immigration, the population of 141.3 million Russians will continue to decline at a rate of about 700,000 per year. This population implosion means that in little more than a decade there will simply be too few Russians to control one-sixth of the world's land mass and perhaps a third of the world's petroleum and natural gas reserves. To further complicate the situation, to the south, energy-starved China -- population 1.4 billion -- already has 70 million more men than women and a military more than double the size of Russia's.
We don't seem to know what Vladimir Putin has decided to do about his country's precarious future, but it would be naive for us to ignore the enormous potential for miscalculation. Better intelligence is a must. Even owls move their heads to look around. Maybe that's why they are said to be wise.
Oliver North is the founder and honorary chairman of Freedom Alliance and author of The Assassins .
Hmmm. And Fred Thompson is Chairman of Condoleeza Rice’s International Security Advisory Board in the State Dept.
Why doesn’t Oliver include the quotes from successive US administrations which unanimously conclude that a weak Russia would be a disaster of immense proportion?
Because those conclusions are wrong.
You’d better take that up with your legislative representative. Sorry you feel threatened. Americans who go to Russia come back and say what a great, warm reception they got. You’ll never find out how good it can be. We’ve moved on. You’re in a rut.
How’s about a return of the neutron bomb?
What is your honest assessment of the situation? We (and presumably they) know their birthrate is below replacement levels, that they are quite cozy with China on the military front, and that they’ve got some cash now - spending it (for example) on missiles and TU-160s. Should it not be China that they view as the threat? It appears that it is us, the U.S., in the crosshairs.
Most of the stuff that Putin does and says is for domestic consumption, it is to look strong and consolidate power and resources of the state and to take them from “bad” oligarchs to the state and “good” oligarchs (e.g. Yukos and Sakhalin-2 etc. and other natural resources companies).
If they didn’t have China as a “friend” they would not have any friends at all, especially after shabby treatment they subjected their “neighbors” in Europe and former CIS with oil and gas gouging, and changes in power in Germany and France. They also need defense against Muslims, especially in the not-so-distant future when oil and gas prices will drop. Their inflation stubbornly exceeds their own 8% target rate and the economy has not been diversified beyond natural resources and military technology despite millions of dollars spent on that.
There aren’t a lot of places who are willing (unless they have to, lest they be open to another “energy blackmail”) to do business with Russia, so they are falling back in with the likes of Chavez and Iran etc. This is not done because of their strength, it’s due to their weakness. This weakness is being masked right now with the higher energy revenue which Putin hopes to transform into other sources of revenue, but so far has only succeeded in leveraging it into some overhyped military technology and sales (mostly due to lower price, not better technology).
If you noticed, he doesn’t go any place where he can’t sell either oil/gas/steel or some military equipment - he is now simply a Salesman in Chief with fewer retail sale outlets than Russia had just a few years ago, in Middle East, Europe and Asia. That’s quite different from trying to restore Russia into being a world power.
They are not a direct danger to us (like Ronald Reagan said “they lose, we win” and that has not changed), though they would not mind seeing us weaker - that’s one way to feel relatively stronger themselves, not unlike France under Chirac was. Putin knows they are weak and try to put-in (bad pun here) a good poker face, but that’s why he was finally publicly “dismissed” by Condoleezza Rice on the subject of missile defense in Poland and Czech Republic - they simply have no real voice on the world stage, except some in UN like Kosovo (where, BTW I hope they succeed). As a matter of fact, Putin’s Russia and Chirac’s France had a lot of similarities in attitude and show of grandeur (or more like delusion of it) - both got slapped into reality by Bush and Condi.
China upstaged Russia in just about anything (economy, political and geopolitical influence, military technology and its growth rate), except oil and gas where they can find cooperation, and same common threat - Islamic fundamentalism.
Putin is just making the best of circumstances (high price of energy) and trying to prevent Russia from heading for a hard crash, but he might be accelerating it by not trying to dismantle the grip on the economy from the oligarchs or the state and allowing entrepreneurs to diversify it.
If you're right, Putin is not all that bad. He's just trying to do what is best. Boy, he sure doesn't invite trust though...
What's best for himself and what he thinks is best for Russia. He is not a Communist [anymore], but he is an opportunist and is still defined by the culture of KGB and projection of power. His chosen successor, Sergei Ivanov, is very much like him : http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1876426/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1880215/posts
As far as trust, no... and he himself made that choice. To quote Ronald Reagan again, "Trust but verify" is very applicable here. We do work much closer on some intelligence matters than many people suspect... but then, we did so with France during Chirac, as well.
> To quote Ronald Reagan again, “Trust but verify”
Reagan certainly used this quote alot. But I recall it long pre-dating Reagan, back to the Nixon days at least. I believe it even pre-dates Nixon. Dunno who originated it, but it was not Ronald Reagan — tho’ he certainly deserved to be the first.
“Dunno who originated it, but it was not Ronald Reagan — tho’ he certainly deserved to be the first.”
It’s actually a translation from an old Russian proverb, just as Reagan was saying it, in full (I cut the Russian part) : “Doveryay, no proveryay - Trust but verify”.
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Russian_proverbs
Transliteration: Doveryay, no proveryay.
Translation: Trust, but verify.
English version: Better safe than sorry.
If Putin ever reads “Atlas Shrugged” it could be very interesting...LOL
SNIPPET: “We don’t seem to know what Vladimir Putin has decided to do about his country’s precarious future...”
#
Opinion - Russia’s future:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=nashi
and nobody immigrates to Russia. ==
Accualy Russia today has 15 mlns of the illegal immigrant population. It is even more then in US. SO a lot who is immigrating in Russia these days.
> To quote Ronald Reagan again, “Trust but verify”
Reagan certainly used this quote alot. But I recall it long pre-dating Reagan, back to the Nixon days at least. I believe it even pre-dates Nixon. Dunno who originated it, but it was not Ronald Reagan — tho’ he certainly deserved to be the first.==
Accualy guys this phrase “trust but verify” is very ancient Russian proverb:). reagan used it in his summit with Gorby to make wonder to him. He succeded in it:) Gorby definetely knew this proverb as any Russian but when he heard it from Reagan he got impressed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.