Wanted: Doves, Lots And Lots Of Doves

(Cartoon by Yaakov Kirschen and published 5/1/14 at his blog, Dry Bones.  Click on image to enlarge.)

I often disagree with Yaakov Kirschen, the Israeli cartoonist who provides today's pictorial comment, but he raises an interesting point when it comes to the situation involving the Ukraine and Russia.  For some reason, Americans always want easily identifiable good guys and bad guys whenever it comes to a dispute.  Whether it's a fight between neighbors or a fight between neighboring countries, we want to be able to pick the "right" side.  Unfortunately, in the real world, such is almost never the case, and it certainly is not in this situation.

That said, however, Mr. Putin's move into the Ukraine is certainly cause for concern throughout the world, especially in central and eastern Europe.  It is also likely that his move is a violation of several treaties and conventions, which in itself is a worrisome state of affairs.  While I understand the concern and the worry, I do not understand the rumbling coming from various conservatives here in the US suggesting that the president needs to get tough, to take a stand, and (God forbid) send in the troops.  The last thing we and the rest of the world needs is sabre rattling and the commitment of US and NATO troops to "saving" the integrity of the Ukraine.

Unfortunately, President Obama seems to be giving in a little to the conservatives' call for definite action.

From the Los Angeles Times:

In a further sign of mounting tensions between Russia and its former Soviet neighbors, the Russian military ordered a new airborne unit to begin helicopter training missions along the western borders with the now-independent Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The maneuvers were called in response to an "unprecedented" increase in NATO military activity near Russia amid the Ukrainian crisis, the RIA Novosti news agency said, attributing the comments to Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization last week ordered stepped-up air patrols of its member states bordering Russia, to reassure allies once under Moscow's domination that the alliance will defend them in the event of Russian aggression.

Hopefully that will be the extent of the involvement.  Hopefully the administration will continue the talks between the Russian Defense Minister and the U.S. Secretary of Defense to defuse some of the tension that is beginning to arise between the two countries.  And, just as important, hopefully Mr. Putin will take the hint from the increasing sanctions being imposed by the president and will withdraw troops threatening to move from their current stations in the Ukraine.

Neither nation needs another Cold War. Nor does the rest of the world.

We Have Always Been At War

There was an absolutely stunning article in yesterday's Washington Post. The main thrust of the article is that sine 9/11 we have entered into a period of perpetual war. War is now the norm, peace a mere anomaly. As a consequence, our country has changed and will continue to change to fit that new norm.

The two sets of buildings tell the story of America’s embrace of endless war in the 10 years since Sept. 11, 2001. In previous decades, the military and the American public viewed war as an aberration and peace as the norm.

Today, radical religious ideologies, new technologies and cheap, powerful weapons have catapulted the world into “a period of persistent conflict,” according to the Pentagon’s last major assessment of global security. “No one should harbor the illusion that the developed world can win this conflict in the near future,” the document concludes.

By this logic, America’s wars are unending and any talk of peace is quixotic or naive. The new view of war and peace has brought about far-reaching changes in agencies such as the CIA, which is increasingly shifting its focus from gathering intelligence to targeting and killing terrorists. Within the military the shift has reshaped Army bases, spurred the creation of new commands and changed what it means to be a warrior.

On the home front, the new thinking has altered long-held views about the effectiveness of military power and the likelihood that peace will ever prevail.

If the article is correct, and I think it may very well be on most levels, then certain key elements of our traditions may have been seriously undermined.

Up until this point, our military has been comprised mostly of "temporary" soldiers, those serving for only a brief two to four year stint. Now, however, with stop-gap measures considered allowable and normal, many more of our soldiers are permanent warriors, rotating in and out of combat zones for years on end. There is no break for a return to civilian status. This in effect isolates our military from the civilian and may be weakening the role of civilian leadership of the military.

Next, because of the nature of this new warfare, the enemy is not a recognizable nation, but a few rogues living or operating inside a country. This means that traditional means of averting war (diplomatic negotiations) are not possible. A specific country may be the site of the new battlefield, but that nation's leaders have no real status either at the beginning or at the end of hostilities.

Further, because of the increasingly sophisticated technology in weapons systems, war appears somehow less lethal. Our unmanned drones take out the enemy with no cost to those operating the drones. This has the effect of somehow suggesting that war is no longer dangerous, at least for our side. The fact that the technology is also improving for our enemies is somehow overlooked. IED's, now harder to spot and more devastating in impact, continue to kill and maim, yet we somehow fail to include that in our assessment. What we must include, however, is the cost of continuing the technological advances: defense budgets become more sacrosanct and less apt to be cut during times of economic stress. This further widens the gap between the civilian and the military.

We will constantly be on a war footing and that will affect every aspect of life. This is not a healthy scenario, but it is one that may be our future, at least in the short term.