Welcome to the New Reset Order
Like the tsars of old, Vladimir Putin strode confidently into St. Andrew’s Hall in the Grand Kremlin Palace on Monday to take the oath of office for his third presidential term.
As white-gloved soldiers pulled open the massive, ornate golden doors for the ruler of Russia since 2000 — who held a slightly different title but the same power the past four years — one could imagine President Obama trotting down the red carpet on Putin’s heels, trying to catch up, as the doors of the throne room shut behind Putin with a bang and Obama is left alone on the other side, knocking to be let in.
Consider it a poetic illustration of the New Reset Order.
In an epic snub as Obama congratulated Putin on his reascendance to the presidency, Putin informed Obama just 48 hours into his new term that he would be skipping the G-8 meeting at Camp David on May 18-19.
It’s the first time since Russia’s membership expanded the group of the world’s top economies to eight that a Russian president won’t attend.
Even better? The Moscow Times reports that, pre-snub, Putin requested the G-8 summit be moved to Camp David from Chicago — and the White House, which denied the report, said “as you wish.”
The reason the White House gave for the G-8 absence is that Putin is too busy finalizing his new cabinet. This, obviously, is a load of borscht. Putin has never stopped ruling since his first presidency, and shuffling his hand-picked technocrat placeholder president, Dmitry Medvedev, meant that the Kremlin has been continually stocked with his hand-picked loyalists.
In his stead, Putin said he’d send Obama’s old burger-eating buddy and new Prime Minister Medvedev.
Today, White House press secretary Jay Carney brushed off Putin’s pullout, saying they weren’t “disappointed” by the decision as “President Putin was just sworn into office and is obviously forming a government, and the president absolutely understands that.”
“It was not a surprise, and it does not at all feel like a snub,” Carney said. “It was something we understood and understand. And again, the president will be meeting with President Putin in one month, which is not much time at all. And he looks forward to that meeting.”
Medvedev was president when Obama came into office and declared that his administration would hit the reset button in relations with Russia. This even included a big cheesy reset button presented by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov — a gesture lost in translation in more ways than one, as the word above the button, “peregruzka,” meant “overcharged,” not “reset.”
The kid-gloved “reset” from the Obama administration worked for Russia — the Kremlin got White House cooperation in pushing through the New START nuclear arms reduction treaty and critical support for its World Trade Organization membership bid. Shortly into his term, Obama dropped plans to deploy a ballistic-missile defense shield in Central Europe, saying he had something better in mind — and conveniently taking a source of Kremlin irritation off the table.
It’s safe to say — with a red stamp of confirmation from the Kremlin this week — that Obama got played.
But not to be outdone, Obama also played the Senate in his efforts to appease Russia, as he’s now falling short on the 11th-hour promises he made to GOP lawmakers before Christmas 2010 to get that treaty ratified and out the door.
After extended wrangling with fence-sitters needed to get past the two-thirds threshold, Obama committed to spend an extra $14 billion to modernize the U.S. nuclear weapons complex over the following decade.
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) was instrumental in extracting that vow in negotiations that yielded louder outcry from Moscow the longer they dragged on.
Obama was famously caught on an open mic in late March telling Medvedev that Putin needs to give him “space” on missile defense as “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” Medvedev, knowing his place in the real pecking order, dutifully responded that he would pass along the message — which also got passed along to the entire Internet — to Vladimir.
That set off the senator who’d worked so hard in late 2010 to get national security assurances from the White House in conjunction with the arms-reduction treaty.
“We know the president supported language in the New START Treaty to link missile defense to nuclear reductions. We know the administration is sharing information with Russia, including plans to deploy missile defenses in Europe,” Kyl said.
Hillary’s schedule:
2013 – Write book about what a fabulous Sec State she was. Buy some skirts.
2014 – Book published. Start talking ominously about foreign developments and how her pro-woman policies would have prevented all this.
2015 – Announce presidential run.
Please, Americans, PLEASE. She’s a terrible Secretary of State! She sucks! She’ll be running against incumbent Romney with any luck in 2016. He’s got to have the guts to say she SUCKED as Secretary of State.
Its not Obama’s fault.
Who sold out the country? That’s right, the Stupid Old Party which backed ratification of the new START Treaty. No one forced them to vote for it.
One of the architects of the GOP vote for it, Sen. Dick Lugar of Indiana, was defeated in his primary bid.
Betrayal of your country has real consequences. Eat that – Dickhead!
old pootin is a long time red red commie. it is rumored that he stole the last election, something in which old school commies truly excel, thus the riots. he is brutal against his people when they protest, as he was brutal when he ran the k.g.b. he still has dreams of russian greatness, and may well be the greatest threat to peace throughout the world.
so, arrayed on our side we have a constant apologetic bender in charge, a v.p. who couldn’t find his arse w/ both hands, a gun running a.g & doj, a rabid feminist (sos), perhaps the weakest senate in history (still no budget), an assortment of phony czars, a plethora of incompetent political appointees, and oh yeah, the wicked witch of the west. what could possibly go wrong?
Russia gave Iran nuclear technology and a modern air defense system. How much more can we trust them? Maybe we could sell the sponsorship of Afghanistan back to them.
– to repeat, “We will bury you.”
He won’t. The last election revealed their are 52% of voting Americans who will gladly do just that.
Never underestimate the stupidity of the voting public.
“The bill would require construction of key new plutonium and uranium facilities, prevent asymmetries between the sizes of U.S. and Russian nuclear forces, and codify the president’s promise of full funding for modernization of the nuclear stockpile. It also would refuse funding for implementing the results of the president’s ongoing nuclear employment strategy review to allow ample time for Congress to consider it.”
Do you really believe any of this is going to happen? There are massive budget cuts that are going to go into effect in January 2013. If Obama is re-elected (God Forbid), this will be so low in his priority list that absolutely no funds will get earmarked for this. None. Count on it. True, Congress could refuse to abide by the terms of the treaty, but Obama could care less. He hates foreign policy and he hates nuclear weapons, so if nothing is done to update our nuclear stockpile it’s no skin off his nose. He would much rather spend money on his precious social-welfare programs rather than on national defense.
If Romney is elected, then he may want to update our nuclear stockpile, but I don’t know where he’s going to find the money for it. Unless Congress stops the automatic budget cuts and defense cuts that kick in on January 2013, there still won’t be any money for this. So I really don’t know what Romney is going to do about it, unless he specifically tells Congress to fund it at the cost of some other government programs. Well, we’ll see if he has the backbone to do that.
“If Romney is elected . .”
Chances are slim to none and Slim just left town. We are wasting time playing by the new Progressive political rules. Civil disobedience will be our only recourse. They must be made to see that they cannot just do whatever they want. Americans have a right to freedom and independence protected by a limited federal government. The voting majority does not “rule”. They simply get to decide who runs the limited government machinery. In the end, there is no argument against that.