Russian Defeat.
The facts of the end of the Cold War support the short and astonishing version that Ronald Reagan's imagination and style won out over American and Allied doubt and the sadistic and stupid Soviet empire. I learned from Martin and Annalise Anderson, Hoover, that Ronald Reagan carried his entire Cabinet and National Security team across the threshold and into the house of Star Wars just because he believed that Star Wars -- a theoretical extravagance against incoming ballistic missiles, never proved at the time -- would demoralize and defeat the Soviet hawks. Ronald Reagan was correct. The Soviets started to crumble when Stalin died. There was no coherent plan for succession, and the regime staggered through Khurshchev and hit the status quo ante of Patriotic War thugs with Brezhnev and Kosygin. Brezhnev's slow, ignorant death left the state to the KGB, which shoved in its grotesque apparatchik Andropov, who prompltly died of kidney failure and ignorance. Reagan's presidency confronted Andropov's sinister paranoia (a thrilling version of this tension in David Hoffman's "Dead Hand)", a state so rotten and blind that the senior apparatus convinced itself that Reagan was going to launch a first strike and piously prepared for Armageddon for the nomenklatura. Chernenko inherited a failed state, and then Gorbachev was handed the keys to an empty state. Reagan challenged the ill-educated Gorbachev to give up his nukes at Iceland. Star Wars overwhelmed the Soviets as a threat they could not to counter. One year after Iceland, Ronald Reagan spoke at the Brandenburg Gate and the Berlin Wall, delivering the ringing 20th Century verdict on the Soviet novelty, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" One year later, Gorbachev tore down the Soviet Empire by shaking Reagan's hand in Moscow and standing idle, in 1989, while the client states abandoned Moscow in a rush of resentment, the clients collapsing from the top as the Soviets would not send troops to prop up the hollow regimes -- Eastern Europe, the Baltic States, the Caucuses and the Stans and then Ukraine all quitting in a helter-skelter of drunken nihilism. Iceland beat the Soviets. Star Wars beat the Soviets. Reagan beat the Soviets. Berlin beat the Soviets. The War of the Worlds, the early years, ended with American World success and Russian World dejection.
Twenty Years Later.
Ronald Reagan's speech is a critical moment in the old war of the worlds, yet it has no place or utility in the new war of the worlds. The defeated Soviet Union is a museum piece that is rarely discussed outside of the academies. The ambitious Russia is an energy superpower that now commands attention and financial obedience in Western Europe, especially Berlin, and also spans Asia as a military superpower. Russia is master of the energy supply to the EU and that means there is no Euro unless Russia continues to deliver. At the same time, Russia wants investment from Europe and Asia, and right now has started bargaining for investors without strings, such as demands for transparency. There is a new Russia that is fresh and savvy, called the civiliki, and it aims to ease out the old and clumsy KGB crowd that came in with Putin, called the siloviki. Medvedev is the center of civiliki, but the brains of the operation is said to be Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin. Long struggle to follow, the uniforms and spooks and thugs vs the technocrats and managed oligarchs. What this means for the US is that the Obama administration is not well positioned to deal with the strength and aggression of Moscow. National Security Adviser Jim Jones was in Moscow last week, negotiating about sanctions and Iran. He played a weak hand. Moscow knows that Tehran has nukes. Moscow wants Tehran to remain a wedge between the Stans and the defeatist jihadist luddites of the Gulf. Moscow also wants to grow to outshine the United States in the 21st Century. In sum, the war of the worlds, the later years, is now rejoined, and Moscow has the advantage of geography and resources and alliances. The Berlin Wall is a patriotic exhibit. Berlin and Moscow are a sturdy alliance. Ronald Reagan freed the people of Eastern Europe and the Caucuses who are now all beholden to the energy pipelines from Moscow. Washington is in the hands of a young and poorly foreign policy schooled team that does not look to regard Moscow as a potent adversary. Leslie Gelb, foreign policy wiseman, judges POTUS as an inexperienced actor who "hasn't done worse than Bush, but who hasn't accomplished much either." Gelb is arguing about Afghanistan, Iraq and the Ummah. My eye fixes on Moscow. I was trained to confront the Russians. I see them now as sophisticated and innovative adversaries and also as very useful comrades in the struggle with the Devils. "There is the right way, the wrong way, and the Russian way," is the proverb. Washington would do well to go along the Russian way in Europe, in the Middle East, in Central Asia. America needs an enforcer, at least someone who can wield a club and guard a pipleline, No evidence so far that Washington is ready to ally with Moscow, as in, enemy of my enemy is not my enemy. How long till the Obama administration comprehends that Moscow is a virile threat unless and until it is regarded with respect and cooperation? Unknown.
I watched my color TV that night in bed, a Christmas present from my parents. Tears of joy rolled down my cheeks. The Great President Reagan had won the cold war without firing a shot.
Afew weeks later, lefty Lennie Bernstein conducted the Berlin Philharmonic in his famous "Ode to Freedom" concert, another tearjerker performance.
Reagan was willing to speak "truth to power" to the liberal intelligentsia. Communism was corrupt and evil, and we intend to fight it. A Simple and noble message.
"Ronaldus Magnus'" enemies lie in ruins: the New York Times is teetering on bankruptcy, the TV Networks are losing to Fox News and cable. The Nuclear freeze crowd has conveniently changed subjects: environmentalism is the new religion and some of the faithful believe Nuclear power can bring us to the carbon-free promised land. The discredited Nobel Committee gave the Peace prize to a guy who ran good Presidential campaign.
Russia is a threat, so is China, their leadership is interested in making money and feeding their people, while we, U.S. Americans, currently look like the Old Soviet Union, deep in debt and stifled by bureaucracy.
Now you know what T.S. Eliot meant when he said that no cause is ever entirely lost, nor ever entirely won.
The true "Star" of the time was Vladimir Horowitz and may have been more influential than any other in loosening and shaking the concrete foundation of the Russian supreme consciousness.
Reagan awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1986 after his lauded return to the Motherland which he had fled in 1925.
The tears flowed from the people like the Volga at his recitals and concerts.
In Moscow: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq7ncjhSqtk
We're all in this together
Maybe, to realize what has been lost and to find it once again.
Might we hope for a resurgent Russia without imperialistic designs... to help fight the Devils.
They could be the breadbasket to a world in need of nourishment.
A few simple, musical notes in humble interpretation by a silent spirit, without boisterousness or blather, brought a proud and defiant people to question their inheritance and the legacy that would be bequeathed to their children.
God help us to understand the beauty we so often take for granted and to realize that all is not revealed.
We are all in this together
Spencer--
If I follow your posts correctly, I like what you are saying. It seems it has been in our interest to cultivate Russia, as difficult as that has been at times. The civiliki and soliviki split is the subject of a multi-series report at Stratfor.com. I no longer subscribe but did find part 1. very surprising (to me) as it suggests Putin is in fact on the losing end of the split.
If anyone has a link to the next in the series, pls post it.
Gelb's piece is good in the sense that it is actually critical of BO's performance to date. Like so much else, esp the DB comments, it all settles into "this is awful" and its still W's fault. Thank you very much, Mr. Gelb. SO WHAT DO YOU SUGGEST? I am prepared, for purposes of moving forward, of stipulating that every unfortunate part of human existence is GB's fault. NOW WHAT?
We're stranded on a desert island with no food or water? NOW WHAT?
the subtext of so much writing and thought these days is how incredibly complex and disadvantageous everything is. If you, can't figure it out well enough to craft a good enough approach, setup aside and let someone else to the heavy lifting. At least GB had the balls to act. So far BO has shown nothing of that, domestically or internationally. Just schmooze, agree to everything, follow through on nothing, accommodate, appease, draw Utopian pipe-dream images from the podium/teleprompter.
If GB was so friggin wrong, roll back the tax cuts for the rich (that incidentally is the 1% who pay 40% of the income taxes), accelerate the Iraq withdrawal, do something about Iran (do you feel lucky, punk?), make up your mind on Afgan sometime before the next ice age (speaking of which-it seems to be hurtling at us), ask to repeal Rx program for seniors, slash the defense budget, roll back "no child", etc. BO has both houses and nearly the supreme court--why has nothing happened??? Manchild in the big boys office, that's why!
After spending three years in Finland and Estonia I can tell you that the Baltics aren't beholden to Russia but do walk a fine line to keep from being "beholden". All of the Baltics are disillusioned with Germany who seeks Russia's energy and therefore it's friendship. All the Baltics (including Finland) distrust Russia and do their utmost to stay clear but sometimes Russia simply sits on them and they cave--in Finland it is the tariff for lumber (lumber is still big in Finland for paper making but the lumber is coming out of Russia; Russia wants the lumber and paper mills to move into Russia and hire Russias at the expense of Finnish industry and workers, so every few months they up the tariff on lumber moving out of Russia--they are aiming to increase the tariff to about 100 percent of where it is now). In Estonia it's trying to keep its independence without being over-run by Russian-Estonians wish to be back in mother Russia.
The US State Department looks on all of Eastern Europe with suspicion (including Poland) and thinks they are a hotbed of trouble because of their "predisposition" about Russia (i.e. somewhere in Russia the old Soviet Union lurks). The current administration has no one to offer an independent voice outside the State Dept "feelings" about Eastern Europe.
Georgia and the Caucuses are a different matter and Ukraine even more so as Russia feels these countries were never "satellites" but part of Russia's "whole cloth".
The lines you see between the civiliki and the soviliki just aren't there--Putin is still on top of both. Medvedev has long been a close ally of Putin since the time they were both part of the Leningrad district (which although St Petersburg changed its name, the district did not). Medvedev may think independently but he thinks in line with Putin....they think as one, so don't be fooled into believing there is anything but support going on. Look to the Russian military--it is revived and being renewed with fresh funding because Putin knows it's important to look strong militarily. Putin learned Reagan's tactics--look strong, talk strong then you are to the outside world, strong. Too bad this administration doesn't think this works.
Sapientia - What amazes me is how easily we accept and submit to thugocracy and outright corruption. Here in NJ, for instance, it is routinely reported that ACORN and the unions are engaging in massive (absentee ballot) voter fraud. At the same time, it is said that that the gubernatorial election here is too close to call. I have yet to hear a rendering of what we might expect if there were no fraud.
For better and for worse, fraud seems to have become incorporated into NJ’s election process. The subtext reads that Republicans, in order to win in this very blue state, simply have to be able to overcome their (somehow) divinely-ordained handicap and recognize fraud as a fixed reality (always giving the advantage to the Dem side of the ledger) that is now so entrenched as to have become, for all intents and purposes, sanctified.
And the people unquestioningly accept the premise and dutifully go to the polls in the vacant performance of their civic duty that guarantees only the continued flight of those who can afford to get out, and the continued rape of those who cannot.
The elections in Afghanistan were not much different. As I understand it, Karzai’s opponent, Abdullah Abdullah, withdrew from the process, branding a runoff as superfluous. Everyone agrees that the first election was fraudulant and seems to be okay with it. It is not inconceivable that the U.S. itself persuaded Karzai’s opponent to quit the field with bribes and/or threats.
Meanwhile, here at home there’s been a run on the treasury – the people’s money – that can only be described as theft. Meanwhile, as taxpayers dig ever deeper into their pockets, it never occurs to them to ask is it legal, is it fair, is it constitutional? What is the down-side of bankrupting a nation? – I’m talking to you Soros!
http://peterkoelliker.blogspot.com/
What do we do with ourselves... you both missed it, but, keep trying!
Forgive me. I'm just being stoopit
To think that one humble servant can change the whole of the bastion of stoicism without speaking a single word.
I'm hopeless
ERSATZ
Good take, Anon! Well informed to boot. I agree that Russia is our adversary. I agree that they are putting on a good show. I also agree that we are not.
‘Show’ is one thing, reality is another. Not sure if it was Kenneth Stevens (some threads back) who informed us of Russia's negative birth rate. This is a symptom of the rot and corruption that barely serves to contain the nation. Russia makes a great effort in trying to recruit young Indians to study there (as a cheaper alternative to studying in the U.S.) Some go, but soon return home, saying it's an ugly and racist place, full of shadows, cruelty and corruption.
What I mean to say is that Russia's ‘show’ is just illusion - meaningless and empty - whereas America is currently internally blocked from showing its true colors. We've elected a man who doesn't like America - one who wishes to destroy it - to represent the face of our nation. This is the face the world sees from which it will draw its just conclusions. It is, however, a false face. It does not portray the real America; the America for which it is impossible to change so radically at the whims of a handful of cynical and disillusioned operatchiks. Once the storm has been unleashed against them and they have been swept aside, the sun will shine again on the 'city on the hill' while Russia will still fester in darkness.
http://peterkoelliker.blogspot.com/
Well, horse manure?? How did that get in here?!
In 1986, at 82 years old, Horowitz fulfilled his desire to "see Russia once more before I die" and returned as "an ambassador of peace." There were less than 400 seats offered to the public, compared to 1,400 reserved for the Soviet VIP. On the day of the recital, people stood outside the concert hall in the rain even though they couldn't hear anything. Hundreds of students broke through security to watch the concert from the balcony and guards couldn't manage to remove them. The concert was broadcast internationally.)
Some extracts from Charles Kuralt: "By the time he reached the music of the (Russian composers Rachmaninov and Scriabin, many in the audience were weeping."
Kuralt also says, "This concert occurred at a time of international tension. The United States Air Force had bombed Libya, provoking an angry outcry from the Soviet Union, and the world's television screens had been full of warlike images for a week. Now, suddenly, on those same screens, appeared the tender image of a great American pianist playing Schumann's 'Traumerei' (Dreaming), one of the Scenes from Childhood, for a Russian audience. The emotion of Horowitz's choice of encores was lost on nobody in the hall."
"'It is not human. It can only come from heaven,' said a concertgoer at an intermission. 'He is the only pianist who can play colors,' said another." [...] "The headline on page one of the New York Times next day summed up the reaction: 'FOR HOROWITZ IN MOSCOW, BRAVOS AND TEARS.'"
Spenser: what I did with myself today is vote. We have no one running here in Texas "just" 11 propositions to change the Texas State constitution. I voted--no to all of them as the expansions they represented are too much for the constitution. They would all be fine as possible legislation--but were put in this form to by-pass the legislature (which here in Texas meets for 3 months every other year--not a misprint). These would not have made it as legislation but put them on an off-year ballot and hey, who knows....
All the propositions were about the State of Texas either "unifying, equalizing or making available statewide" issues in property appraisal, property tax, incentive funding for colleges etc i.e. they were about property and taxes--all of which are local issues in our state. In voting no I decided they should stay local issues.
So, this is what I have done today. Tomorrow I will continue to figure out who in my voting area is for less government and for more fiscal constraint.
How does any of this effect US foreign policy? It doesn't...but I figure the 32 years I spent in the military with my family mostly in tow already represents grass roots foreign policy makers--my children, their spouses and their children have actually lived in "foreign" lands, seen other govts operate, know more about what the average person on the "street" in the 6 or so countries we lived in and will have that when they enter the voting "booth" (more like touch the voting screen but you get the idea).
It's not much but I am hopeful and it's what I can do. What about you, what do you think we should be doing?
Uhh... I think I was referencing the influence Horowitz had in the fall of the Soviet Union. I don't know for sure, though. It was something that just struck me as important. "What do we do with ourselves" was entirely structured around what one person might accomplish.
Did you know that Horowitz left a grant of 300K to Julliard to be devoted to poor, promising pianists? He stipulated that his name not be used or associated with the endowment. Strange, huh?
I don't know about amendments (?) to the Texas Constitution, but, I think it happens all the time in just about every State. I may be wrong there, too, though. So, don't trust me on that either.
What do I think we should be doing? Well, you know... stuff we are doing.
I commend you on the stuff you have done and are doing!!!
http://lala.com/ztMe Danse macabre
REAL HOPE VS. BS HOPE
There are big differences between Reagan and Obama, aside from politics.
Reagan was an optimist, who brought the country along with him. It was real hope/real change.
Obama is one big, whining, hand-wringing complainer: I need a bigger mop. Look at the crap I have to clean up. Some people call it a socialist mop. Yuk. Yuk.
But there's something bigger. It has to do with Chicago culture meeting up with the culture of corruption in Washington. It seems to be leading us into a death spiral -- starting with bankruptcy from health care 'reform', then Cap and Trade.
The truth is we can't afford Obama's negative no-hope, utopian, inept change.
"What do we do with ourselves"-- I think I could have been citing the Moscow audience in the video of "Traumerei" and the resigned, unsettled, and perplexed ambiance in the hall.
To me, it seemed that they had confronted the past and were fearful of a dreaded abyss, yet, knew that the time was surely approaching when the old walls would crumble.
Horowitz once said, "My future is in my past and my past is in my present. I must now make the present my future."
We can "Dream" for more emissaries of peace and reasoned deliberations of the path to the future that we send our children down.
"Not sure if it was Kenneth Stevens (some threads back) who informed us of Russia's negative birth rate."
It was indeed I who made reference to Russia's population crash, although at the time I had assumed--incorrectly--that that country's population crash was common knowledge.
To reiterate: Russia's total fertility rate (TFR) is 1.17 children per womam, nowhere near the magic number of 2.1 that keeps population stable By 2050 the Russian population will likely decline from the current 143 million to 112 million, at which point national extinction becomes a genuine possibility, perhaps helped along by the lack of sufficient manpower to defend their borders against any future invaders.
While this may indeed be "a symptom of the rot and corruption that barely serves to contain the nation," the EU does little better. The continent's TFR is only 1.5, again far below replacemnt rate, with Catholic Italy the least fertile, barely managing a TFR of 1.2 births. While the attention of so many here is fixed on the comparatively trivial challenge posed by Iran, Europe is dying, soon to be replaced by Eurabia.
As for America, we're not doing all that terrifically either, but I lack the time and inclination to give the you the numbers just now. The hour grows late.
My above post was even more clumsily written than usual. I plead exhaustion.
Please, somebody call 911 and send them to Spencer's house. There's seems to be a person there going insane.
Spencer's not going insane he is talking about what the commitment of one person (in this case Horowitz) can do. And I think his question (to us) is admirable.
What can we do? I liked what Mike said about real hope--that it's optimism not complaining that people are looking for (i.e. Reagan versus Obama). What we can do is be optimistic in everything we do.
By the way, all proposals for changes in the Texas constitution passed by either a 70 percent or 80 percent approval (this is 180 degrees out of phase with the way I voted). Only 8 percent of the electorate turned out...I am sad but I hope not whinny....8 percent, should election results like this stand? Is a "I didn't vote" really a "vote"? Gotta love representative govt, you don't have to be smart to be part of the electorate.....LOL. This doesn't mean I think voters (or non-voters) were not smart, just that no one actually took time to figure out what the issues really were. (not trying to be whinny, not trying to be whinny, not trying to be whinny...darn it! I am being whinny :-)
Aw, come on, now, Jim. I think you have missed the point I was making.
I was presenting a premise that has been overshadowed and overlooked for far too long. The 20 year anniversary of the fall of the Wall is soon and people will celebrate another "Cry of Freedom" once more with "Bravos and Tears."
To begin, I wrote, "The true "Star" of the time was Vladimir Horowitz and may have been more influential than any other in loosening and shaking the concrete foundation of the Russian supreme consciousness."
May we hope for more emissaries of peace who are capable of stirring those emotions and painting the grayness with vivid colors.
Please listen-> In Moscow: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq7ncjhSqtk "Traumerei" (Dreaming)
We're all in this together
I was hoping someone would come along with me, but, of course, it seems all anyone wants to do anymore is just harp and voice their displeasure with everything.
Humumm---> talk about insane, you want to know my list?
By the way, I watched the Moscow concert as it was being broadcast live and I knew then that the world had witnessed something extraordinary.
"A few simple, musical notes in humble interpretation by a silent spirit, without boisterousness or blather, brought a proud and defiant people to question their inheritance and the legacy that would be bequeathed to their children."