Suckers

Looking past the secular piety in this NYT article on Ukraine and game theory, a lesson:
[A]fter the Soviet Union split into many pieces in the 1990s, a newly independent Ukraine gave up its portion of the old Soviet nuclear arsenal. In part, it did so in exchange for a memorandum supporting its territorial integrity, signed by both Russia and the United States.

Eliminating its nuclear weapons may have seemed a good deal for Ukraine at the time, and it can be argued that the world became a safer place. Yet if Ukraine were a nuclear power today, it would surely have a far greater ability to deter Russian military action.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will eventually be enslaved by those who kept their swords.

7 comments:

Tom said...

When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace. /
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease. /
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe, /
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the devil you know."

E Hines said...

Right before Rome overran Carthage for the last time, they convinced the Carthaginians to disarm. "Don't worry," they said, "you won't need your arms anymore."

And Kerry, while warning Putin that we'll apply sanctions if the Crimean "referendum" goes through, assured Vlad, "Don't worry, we're trying not to hurt your feelings. You shouldn't take them personally."

Then, for strategists in China and elsewhere in Asia seeking clues to American behavior, it’s possible that the effectiveness of the United States response on Crimea will matter a great deal. For actual deterrence, the United States would mainly need to create negative consequences for Russia, not just engage in posturing.

Heh.

Eric Hines

Anonymous said...

I feel sorry for the next US President. He's going to have a war on his hands, because of these idiots.

Valerie

Grim said...

Most likely, this one will have a war on his hands sometime next week.

E Hines said...

You're assuming he, and his Western Europe apologists and cronies, have the stones--or the military wherewithal--to fight one.

The only hands next week's war (or next month's) will be on are those of Ukraine, the Baltics, and Poland.

And if the next US president is Clinton, well, then....

Eric Hines

raven said...

The Russians are holding some good cards-I don't suppose it has occurred to any of the enlightened leg-tinglers that one of our main supply lines runs through Russian dominated territory. They are in an ideal position to put pressure on our troops in Afghanistan. Wonder if we will see them supplying the mujahedin with manpads. Be a strange and ironic twist.
For some reason I keep thinking about the Brit's retreat from Kabul in 1842.

douglas said...

For those that like to use Isaiah 2:4 to encourage disarmament, refer them to the beginning of the chapter- Isaiah 2:2-
"2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it."

When that happens, I'll happily beat my swords into plowshares. Till then, swords it is.