Russia: Friend or Foe?

Russia has been constantly in the news since the election of Donald Trump in 2016. I would like to make a comparison with the formidable task that President Trump faces, and the one faced by Vladimir Putin, the recently re-elected leader of Russia. It has been said that the job of President of the United States is the most difficult one in the world, but it seems to me that the Russian Premier’s job is much more difficult.

You just have to glance at a map to see that Russia is surrounded by enemies. If Islamic militancy is a great danger to us, it is a far greater threat to Russia which is bounded on the south by Iran and Kazakhstan. Even within its borders the large Muslim population, especially the fiercely independent Chechens, constitutes a constant menace.

American commentators on both the left and the right like to blame Putin for his involvement in Syria but Putin has much more to fear from ISIS and other radical Moslem extremists than America does. These same commentators should ask what business the United States has in Syria, Iraq, or Afghanistan.  Geographically, we are 6000 miles away from the war-torn scene.

Moreover, while we worry about trade relations with nearby Canada and Mexico. Russia is bordered by industrial and military superpowers. To the West the economy of the European Union dwarfs that of Russia, a third-world economy compared to Germany alone. In addition, the NATO alliance is a very serious military presence on Russia’s doorstep and seems to continually seek new members. Of course, the presence of NATO is also the presence of the United States.

To the East, Russia is bordered by Mongolia, a Chinese province, and then by China itself, an industrial and military superpower. The Chinese population and economy far outstrip that of Russia. In recent years Putin has negotiated deals that have made Russia a leading supplier of energy to the growing Chinese population and economy. In this respect, Russia’s relationship with China resembles Canada’s with the USA.

Even though Russia doesn’t border North Korea, Pyongyang the capitol of North Korea is only 400 miles from the Russian Pacific port city of Vladivostok. That’s about the same as the distance from Los Angeles to San Francisco. Who should have more to fear from a North Korean nuclear weapon, Russia or the USA? I would also guess that the South Korean economy is further advanced than Russia’s.

We should try to put ourselves in Putin’s shoes. Twenty-five years ago the collapse of the Soviet Empire was a tremendous loss both strategically and psychologically. With the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Empire, Russia effectively lost the Cold War. Former satellite countries like East Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, and the Ukraine fell away into independent states that sought entrance into the NATO military alliance. Geographically, Russia is still the largest country in the world, but its population has shrunk to 143 Million. Compare this figure with China’s 1.3 Billion population or even with the more than 300 Million population of the USA.

When Germany and Japan were defeated in World War II, we rebuilt those shattered countries and they became not only two of the world’s great powers but two of our most reliable allies. When Russia lost the Cold War we could have attempted something similar instead of seeing it as a threat.

During the Presidential campaign Donald Trump made some remarks about seeking a new, positive relationship with Russia. However, since the election a number of reasons has led his administration to act tough on Russia. Economic sanctions have been imposed, and diplomats have been expelled in response to some of Putin’s moves. Also, NATO has been flexing its muscles, and the new 1.3 Trillion USA budget promises an escalation of the arms race.

I fail to see the value of driving Putin’s back to the wall, especially since his country has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. Why tempt him to use it over the poisoning of a spy? I think it would be much more advantageous to take the pressure off Russia both economically and militarily.

Economically, our objective should be to help rebuild the Russian economy in the same way that we did for Germany and Japan after World War II. The United States, Russia, and Saudi Arabia are the world’s three leading suppliers of oil and natural gas. Russia’s geographic position should make it the largest supplier for energy poor Europe. We should encourage this natural trade relationship and not try to upset it with sanctions or price manipulation designed to weaken the Russian economy. A prosperous Russia with a growing middle class is in the best interests of the United States.

Militarily, we could ease the pressure on Russia so that such a large percentage of their GNP does not have to go into military spending. The first step would have to be an agreement that would guarantee the independence of the Ukraine. If Putin would agree to that, NATO could agree to pull back its forces from the Ukrainian border.

Actually, I fail to see why we should not offer NATO membership to Russia itself. After all, it is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Originally, NATO was designed to counter the military might of the aggressive Communist Soviet Empire. Now that Empire no longer exists, and Communism is a dead letter. The United States and Europe would be much better able to deal with the great geo-political problems of the twenty first century if Russia was an ally and not an enemy.

###

Statistics 2018

                                             

On a recent trip to India Citizen Hillary Clinton found another reason for her loss in the 2016 Presidential election. To the list that includes Russia, and James Comey, the former director of the FBI, she added White Married Women living in deplorable states that contribute little to the Gross National Product (GNP).

Perhaps forgetting her origins as a white, married woman married to a controlling husband from Arkansas, she believes that these women were influenced to vote for Trump by their husbands, sons, bosses etc. She cannot believe that these married white women could have been reasonable or intelligent enough to make up their own minds.

Clinton’s statement must mirror the feelings of many of her former fans. Her complaint about “deplorables” in the campaign only mirrored Barack Obama’s remark about people clinging unreasonably to their guns and religion in the 2008 campaign.  The idea that anyone opposed to the liberal/progressive agenda must be an ignorant, superstitious redneck has become ingrained in a large segment of American society.

People like Citizen Clinton, former President Obama, and Socialist Democrat Bernie Sanders cannot believe that reason, knowledge, and experience can exist on the other side of the political spectrum. Their more progressive followers cannot even stomach independence or moderation in politics. The way in which they shout down or even ban speakers on college campuses is just a sign that they cannot imagine that these speakers have anything reasonable to say.

To act in such a way means they must ignore certain inconvenient facts or truths. Here are some statistics on current issues culled from articles in the most recent issue of the St. CroixReview, a small independent, mid-western journal of opinion.

Issue 1: Tax cuts.

In 1980, the last fiscal year of the Carter administration, total Federal tax revenues were $517 billion. By 1988 after the implementation of the Reagan tax cuts, total Federal revenues had grown to $909 billion.  The economic growth stimulated by lower tax rates had caused Federal revenues to grow by almost 50% during the Reagan years. Reducing the highest tax rate from 50% to 28% did not cause government revenue to decline.

By 2003, the year in which the so-called Bush tax cuts were passed, total Federal Revenues were $1723 billion. By 2007 Federal tax revenues had grown to about $2568 billion although they did drop in 2008 to $2524 billion at the start of the Great Recession. Once again, economic growth had led to increased Federal tax revenue despite lower tax rates.

The evidence that lower tax rates cause Federal revenue to increase would make you wonder why conservative opponents of big government usually are the ones to favor lower rates, while liberals are the ones who oppose tax cuts. Of course, despite increased revenues federal deficits continued to increase as spending regularly outstripped income.

Issue 2:  Progressivism, Socialism, and Communism

Exhaustive studies in recent years have shown that the death toll in Communist regimes during the past 100 years has been more than imagined. The death toll in the Soviet Union during the Stalin years alone is now estimated at between 60 to 70 Million. The death toll in China under Chairman Mao was also about 60 to 70 Million. These were not war casualties but murders of their own citizens.

Although they pale in comparison with Russian and China, Communist regimes in southeast Asia, like North Korea, Vietnam, and Cambodia have also caused the deaths of millions either by famine, imprisonment, or execution. The Communist regime in Cuba, the darling of progressives in this country, is no exception. It is estimated that 100,000 Cubans have died at the hands of the Castro regime; 1000000 have fled the country, and about 500000 have been through the Cuban prison systems.

The numbers are still rising but the total deaths now attributed to Communist regimes in the past 100 years is put at 140 million. Why are these regimes so admired in progressive circles?  The Holocaust with its 6 Million dead is the subject of innumerable books and films. How many films have been made about Russia’s Gulag prison camps, or the millions who died in Mao’s cultural revolution?  Why is the murderous Che Guevara lionized on American college campuses? Even today thousands are fleeing Venezuela where the Communist/Socialist regime is systematically starving its own people.

Given these statistics, is it unreasonable to be suspicious of those who advocate a larger and larger role of government in our lives?

Issue 3: Tariffs.

In 2005 China’s share of global solar cell production was 7%. By 2012 China’s share of global solar panel construction had increased to 61%. During that period 30 American solar panel makers went out of business.  The Wall Street Journal always plumps for free trade but it is not free trade when a country subsidizes its own industries whose products, of often inferior quality,  flood the American market. After all, who cares if a solar panel lasts only five or ten years?

###

Chess and Basketball?

I learned to play Chess as a boy but never had much of a chance to play until I retired ten years ago. Since then I have been an avid, if average, player, playing every Wednesday with a group of similar players at our local Senior center. Despite the common perception, I have come to believe that chess is a team sport.

We all have the image of the solitary chess master hovering over the board and lost in thought while contemplating the next move. But to my mind the chess player is the coach and the real players are the pieces on the board. It doesn’t take much experience to realize that if these pieces don’t work together, they will not win.

It is the coach’s job first to get his players into the game. In other words, they must be placed out in the field of play as quickly as possible. In chess it is called development. The major pieces (knights, bishops, rooks) are more powerful than pawns and constitute the starting team. Not only must the coach put them into play quickly, he must place them properly so that they cooperate and defend one another. If they can’t work together, the game is inevitably lost. 

Even the Queen, the most powerful piece on the board, cannot capture the opponent’ s King by herself. She needs the support of at least one other piece to checkmate. Only the opponent’s Queen can confront her power alone, but she can be neutralized and sometimes captured by being double or even tripled teamed by less powerful pieces working together.

Team work is the key to success in most sports. Basketball, with only five players on the court, is no exception. March is the month when the basketball season reaches its apex. The NBA regular season, where most games are little more than exhibitions, is coming to an end. The Pros will soon start to get serious in the playoffs.

Despite the magnitude of the stars in the NBA, it is still a team game. Some think that Cleveland’s LeBron James is the best player to ever play the game, but Cleveland still had to make some trades in mid-season to bolster its chances for a title. The continued success of the Golden State Warriors is due to the way in which they have integrated super-stars Kevin Durant and Steph Curry into their team concept. On the other hand, the New York Knicks struggled through years of mediocrity because they could not induce superstar Carmelo Anthony to embrace the team concept.

The NCAA collegiate championship series has just begun. It is usually called March Madness but insanity might be a better description. All over the country millions of people are filling out their brackets trying not only to predict the eventual champion but also the winner of every game in the 68 team tournament.

Interestingly, the most successful college team in the past decade has been the University of Connecticut’s Women’s team. It is true that the success of the team has enabled UCONN Coach Geno Auriemma to continually recruit all-star high school athletes from all over the country. The team is loaded with talent and their average margin of victory must exceed 30 points per game.

Nevertheless, Auriemma’s stature as a coach has enabled him to get his extremely talented athletes to play together as a team. I just read about a local high school men’s coach who urged his young studs to emulate the way the UCONN women play defense.  In other words, Auriemma has been able to get the UCONN stars to not just think of individual stats but to play defense as well as offense. Recently, one of the UCONN women remarked that Auriemma would find it difficult to coach men because they are so thick-headed when it comes to team play.

Even on the high school level it takes a strong coach to get young men to play together as a team. The natural desire of athletes to show their stuff is magnified these days by pressure to get college scholarships. Also, sports reporters often become star-struck and concentrate all their attention on the high scoring players and their stats.

It has often been said that legendary players like Larry Bird and Michael Jordan were able to bring out the best in their teammates. In doing so, they also won numerous championships. This is true not just in chess and basketball but in business, politics, and practically every aspect of life. It is certainly true in family life where mothers and fathers give themselves to bring out the best in their children.

###