We’ll see whether Obama comes up with an ISIS strategy. But he already has one for Ukraine: Write it off. Hence the more shocking statement in that Aug. 28 briefing: Obama declaring Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — columns of tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery and a thousand troops brazenly crossing the border — to be nothing new, just “a continuation of what’s been taking place for months now.”
And just to reaffirm his indifference and inaction, Obama mindlessly repeated his refrain that the Ukraine problem has no military solution. Yes, but does he not understand that diplomatic solutions are largely dictated by the military balance on the ground?
No, it’s clear he doesn’t understand that, or possibly more correctly, he refuses to understand it. Wishful thinking and temporary stances rule the day.
When it comes to Ukraine, Russia is willing to go to war for it and we aren’t. That has little to do with Obama, and most everything to do with the geopolitical fact that Russia believes it has great national interests at stake there, and we don’t. The proper course in that circumstance is for us to either turn a blind eye and shut up about it, or to have cut a bigger deal with Russia, one where Ukraine is the smaller stake, long before the tanks rolled in. Both options are ugly and more than a little sordid, yet preferable to the course of action Obama has followed.
Drawing self-erasing red lines and making unenforceable demands merely whets the appetites of a man like Putin. “Obama tried and failed to stop me in Ukraine,” goes the thinking, “so let me see where else he’ll fall back from.” It’s nice to see that NATO might finally be getting semi-serious about defending the Baltic States, but that’s a bit like jury-rigging the henhouse door shut after the fox has already taken one of the hens — he’s going to come sniffing around again, probing for weak spots.
Major wars have begun over less.
(Hat tip to Longtime Sharp VodkaPundit Reader™ JLW for that last link, which I seriously recommend you click.)