IP: [do you sleep better now djf] essay: CRISIS DE-ESCALATION

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

Please note neither JOCK NOR I ARE THE AUTHOR. djf
> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 21:03:20 -0500
> From: Jock Gill <jgill () penfield-gill com>
> To: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
>
>
> Dave,
>
> This is longer than usual, but I would really like to know what the
> IP list thinks.  BTW, I am not the author.  It was sent without
> attribution.  None the less, I find the analysis and arguments in the
> essay to be both compelling and sobering.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jock
>
> CRISIS DE-ESCALATION
>
> ABSTRACT: Events in the former Yugoslavia have produced a
> deterioration in United States/Russian Federation relations which
> constitute the most real possibility of a generalized European war
> since 1945. This memo offers an assessment and a workable exit
> strategy for this crisis.
>
> HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: The ideological clash between Eastern and
> Western Europe has its roots in the theological schism between the
> Latin-Catholic West and the Greek-Orthodox East. Pan-Slavic,
> Eastern-Orthodox solidarity between Russia and Serbia must be viewed
> as absolute for at least the last 150 years. It is doubtful that the
> Russians can permit Ground Forces to attack the Serbians, and
> possibly, occupy Serbia without responding. Russian failure to take
> military action may well collapse the Yeltsin government, and lead to
> its replacement by either extreme rightwing nationalist elements, a
> de facto military government, or the reascension of the Communist
> Party to power.
>
> The historical significance of Kosovo lies at the heart of Serbian
> identity vis-a-vis their apocalyptic conflict with the Ottoman
> Turks.  The brutality of Serbian conduct in Kosovo in recent days is
> undeniable and at stake is a perception of NATO by the entire Muslim
> world which could have long-range implications for the West's
> relations with Islam as well as political reactions by NATO peoples
> revulsed by Serbian brutality.
>
> Nonetheless, the recognition of and eventual solution of the now de
> facto Kosovar-Albanian refugee problem must be subordinated to the
> more pressing need for active Russian participation and cooperation
> in any viable and stable regional state system. Current events
> threaten t he stability of Macedonia, Albania, and the still restive
> Croatia and Bosnia. But, the ultimate theater danger stems from the
> two NATO members, Greece and Turkey, who could be drawn into the
> conflict on opposite sides.
>
> Compensatory action must come before the Russians send volunteers,
> regular units or weapons to Serbia in defiance of the UN embargo
> against Serbia in an effort to create either a Vietnam-like quagmire
> for the US and NATO or to engage in a direct conflict using Russian
> forces. They are preparing to make this kind of military commitment
> as a token of Russian seriousness and regional importance, and as a
> signal to their own population of their still-potent military
> status.  Once military and political preparations have been placed on
> an actual war-footing, it is impossible to predict what might trigger
> generalized hostilities in any situation, much less the now fully
> inflamed Balkan Theater.
>
> CRISIS PROBLEM: Serbia is not the primary crisis; US-Russian
> relations are the main event.  The Serbs will fight to annihilation
> and pan-slavic [Russian] galvanization against NATO and the US is
> imminent and occurent as the bombing continues. Russian humiliation
> and loss of face over the last ten years has reached critical mass
> and has been sublated to a near war fervor.  Any clash -- repeat any
> -- with NATO or American forces will play further into the hands of
> the worst extreme rightwing elements in Russia. The NATO air assault
> on Serbia, following on the heels of the integration of Poland,
> Checkoslovakia, and Hungary into NATO, has further fueled an
> historical and emotional response which interacts synergistically
> with Russian strategic perceptions of genuine threats on their own
> borders and buffer states (Ukraine, Romania). The possibility of war
> with Russia is non-zero -- and could go theater nuclear.
>
> DIPLOMATIC SOLUTION: In six days since the bombing began,
> American-Russian relations have reached their most dangerous point of
> confrontation ever. An exit strategy for NATO and bridge building
> strategy for America and Russia must be implemented immediately.
>
> Any exit strategy must allow both sides to retreat from the precipice
> with honor and dignity and obtain multi-partisan support for a
> rational rapprochement in the principle countries [America and
> Russia], whose vital and improving good relations have been
> egregiously disrupted by the regrettable events in the Balkans since
> the break up of the former Yugoslavia.
>
> No vital American interest will be served by sending ground troops
> into Kosovo.
>
> EXIT STRATEGY: Immediate talks must be held with the Russian
> government on its highest levels.  The will of the American people as
> well as their vital interests are patently to assure good relations
> and future cooperation with the Russian Federation with respect to
> European peace and security as well as numerous areas of cultural,
> economic and scientific cooperation. The current policy is dangerous
> and untenable.  A new policy must be associated with new implementors
> who have the experience to deal with the Russians credibly. If the
> administration is to successfully signal a change of policy and
> disassociate itself from escalating collateral carnage in Serbia as
> well as the worsening and increasingly embittered state of Russian
> relations, it must send a new face to deal with a Russian perception
> of unparalleled affront to their historical sensibilities and their
> notions of current strategic necessity and danger. Arrangements with
> the IMF are an inadequate guarantor of stable relations between major
> powers whose vital strategic and political interests are perceived as
> gravely threatened.  Madeline Albright should resign to be replaced
> by James Baker, a seasoned hand with whom the Russians have had
> rapport and whose appointment will enhance bipartisan support in the
> US.
>
> Patently, the current policy has blundered into confrontation with a
> major threat which it had not foreseen. The new governments of
> Britain, France, and Germany are inexperienced. In seeking to assert
> an overly-localized view of European security, which fails to take
> into account relations between the US and the Russian Federation,
> these Governments have transformed a regional  peacemaking exercise
> into a major power confrontation and have rekindled many of the most
> dangerous impulses of the Cold War between these Great Powers. The
> damage inflicted on Serbia by Operation Allied Force approximates an
> appropriate punishment for Serbian brutality in Kosovo. The signal
> failure of the current State Department policy to apprehend and
> foresee the implications of its potential for major power
> confrontation necessitates a new Appointment. The new Appointment
> must retrieve lost ground and reverse Russian perceptions of
> increasing marginalization by NATO in their historical and current
> Sphere of Influence. It is as important for the new Appointment to
> reassure the Russians of our respect and desire for a Great Power
> relationship as it is to enlist their aid in solving the current
> crisis, indeed perhaps more so. The current crisis between the United
> States and the Russian Federation can be seen as a self-amplifying
> confrontation stemming from the initial failure of the US to have
> consulted Russia and coordinated action with Russia in a fashion
> consistent with Russia's image as a damaged but still Real World
> Power. If the widening chasm is not closed swiftly, even future US
> Administrations may be unable to avoid new and hostile threats and
> alliances, whose structure is currently unforeseeable, but which may
> run the gamut from a Red-Brown alliance in Russia to a Eurasian
> alliance between Moscow, Bejing, and others, either of which may pose
> a New Peer Threat and necessitate a full-scale Two-War Capability by
> the United States.
>
> SUMMARY CONCLUSION: The possibility of a genuinely unforeseen
> incident, which could spiral out of control into a general armed
> conflict directly between the United States and the Russian
> Federation, as well as some of the possibilities cited above, must be
> obviated by good sense, good faith, and sound statesmanship at this
> extremely dangerous crossroads in post-Cold War Relations between the
> two Great Powers.
>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Jock Gill
> www.penfield-gill.com
> Infrared Internet Vision
> ____________________________________________________________________