The
Irresponsibility of Small Nations
By Paul Craig Roberts
August 23, 2019 "Information
Clearing House"
- After falsely accusing Russia of violating the
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF),
Washington unilaterally repudiated the treaty.
Thus did the US military/security complex rid
itself of the landmark agreement achieved by
Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev that defused
the Cold War.
The INF Treaty was perhaps the most important of
all of the arms control agreements achieved by
American 20th century presidents and now
abandoned in the 21st century by US
neoconservative governments. The treaty removed
the threat of Russian missiles against Europe
and the threat of European-based US missiles to
Russia. The importance of the treaty is due to
its reduction of the chance of accidental
nuclear war. Warning systems have a history of
false alarms. The problem of US missiles on
Russia’s border is that they leave no time for
reflection or contact with Washington when
Moscow receives a false alarm. Considering the
extreme irresponsibility of US governments since
the Clinton regime in elevating tensions with
Russia, missiles on Russia’s border leaves
Russia’s leadership with little choice but to
push the button when an alarm sounds.
That Washington intends to put missiles on
Russia’s border and pulled out of the INF Treaty
for this sole purpose is now obvious. Only two
weeks after Washington pulled out of the treaty,
Washington tested a missile whose research and
development, not merely deployment, were banned
under the treaty. If you think Washington
designed and produced a new missile in two weeks
you are not intelligent enough to be reading
this column. While Washington was accusing
Russia, it was Washington who was violating the
treaty. Perhaps this additional act of betrayal
will teach the Russian leadership that it is
stupid and self-destructive to trust Washington
about anything. Every country must know by now
that agreements with Washington are meaningless.
|
Are You Tired Of
The Lies And
Non-Stop Propaganda?
|
Surely the
Russian government understands that there are
only two reasons for Washington to put missiles
on Russia’s border: (1) to enable Washington to
launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike that leaves
Russia no response time, or (2) to enable
Washington to threaten such a strike, thus
coercing Russia to Washington’s will. Clearly,
one or the other of these reasons is of
sufficient importance to Washington for
Washington to risk a false alarm setting off a
nuclear war.
Military analysts can talk all they want about
“rational players,” but if a demonized and
threatened country with hostile missiles on its
border receives a warning with near zero
response time, counting on it to be a false
alarm is no longer rational.
The 1988 treaty achieved by Reagan and Gorbachev
eliminated this threat. What purpose is served
by resurrecting such a threat? Why is Congress
silent? Why is Europe silent? Why is the US and
European media silent? Why do Romania and Poland
enable this threat by permitting US missiles to
be stationed on their territory?
Little doubt the Romanian and Polish governments
have been given bagfulls of money by the US
military/security complex, which wants the
multi-billion dollar contracts to produce the
new missiles. Here we see the extreme
irresponsibility of small countries. Without the
corrupt and idiotic governments of Romania and
Poland, Washington could not resurrect a threat
that was buried 31 years ago by Reagan and
Gorbachev.
Even the American puppet state of occupied
Germany has refused to host the missiles. But
two insignificant states of no importance in the
world are subjecting the entire world to the
risk of nuclear war so that a few Romanian and
Polish politicians can pocket a few million
dollars.
Missiles on Russia’s borders that provide no
response time are a serious problem for Russia.
I keep waiting for Moscow to announce publicly
that on the first sign of a missile launching
from Romania or Poland, the countries will
immediately cease to exist. That might wake up
the Romanian and Polish populations to the
danger that their corrupt governments are
bringing to them.
Why aren’t the Romanian and Polish provocations
sufficient justification for Russia to pre-emptively
occupy both countries? Is it more provocative
for Russia to occupy the two countries than it
is for the two countries to host US missiles
against Russia? Why only consider the former
provocative and not the latter?
No one is capable of coming to Romania and
Poland’s aid even if anyone was so inclined.
NATO is a joke. It wouldn’t last one day in a
battle with Russia. Does anyone think the United
States is going to commit suicide for Romania
and Poland?
Where are the UN resolutions condemning Romania
and Poland for resurrecting the specter of
nuclear war by hosting the deployment of US
missiles on their borders with Russia? Is the
entire world so insouciant that the likely
consequences of this act of insanity are not
comprehended?
It does seem that human intelligence is not up
to the requirements of human survival.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of
the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate
editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was
columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News
Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many
university appointments. His internet columns
have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts'
latest books are
The Failure of Laissez Faire
Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West,
How America Was Lost,
and
The Neoconservative Threat to
World Order.
Donate
and support Dr, Roberts Work.
==See Also==
The Myth of American
Military Dominance:
Dominance can only be measured through
performance, and the United States’ history does
not support a narrative of conventional military
dominance.
The
views expressed in this article are solely those
of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of Information Clearing House.
