The 80s called. . .

Last updated on: March 2, 2014 at 4:28 pm by Jane the Actuary

The 80s called. . . 2014-03-02T16:28:00-06:00 Jane the Actuary

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Found this classic quote from Salon by googling “the 80s called” + cold war:

In an exchange about al-Qaida during the debate, Obama attacked Romney for calling Russia “without question, our No. 1 geopolitical foe” earlier this year.“

“Gov. Romney, I’m glad you recognize al-Qaida is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what is the biggest geopolitical group facing America, you said Russia, not al-Qaida,” Obama said. “You said Russia. And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back. Because the Cold War has been over for 20 years. But Governor, when it comes to our foreign policy, you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s, just like the social policy of the 1950s, and the economic policies of the 1920s.”

Yeah, and in the process, I discovered that every blogger out there is using this reference in talking about the current crisis in Ukraine. (Current Drudge top headline, a Washington Post article, here.)

And, of course, it’s entertaining to indulge in this schadenfreude of mocking Obama for being so foolish as to imagine that a “reset button” was going to lead to World Peace, just as much as the Left liked to mock Bush’s statement that he “looked into Putin’s eyes.”

(Funny thing is, in talking about this with my husband yesterday, I found myself referring to the “Soviet Union” rather than Russia.)

And yet — now, of course, we’ve got the situation in which Russia has already militarily intervened, and will probably succeed in taking Crimea and either annexing it or declaring it to be independent. And the West will probably spout out words of outrage but do nothing more than when Russia invaded Georgia in 2008 — because there aren’t really any good alternatives. As this article on pjmedia.com points out, this is not a simple matter of replacing a dictator with a democrat and everything’s good. Ukraine has a very troubled economy and no tradition of true democratic governance, but plenty of corruption to go around. They’re shockingly poor for a European country, with kleptocrats helping themselves to any wealth the country does produce. (Besides, knowing how willingly the Ukrainians collaborated with the Germans in the Holocaust makes them less sympathetic than your generic oppressed people, though the Holomodor counterbalances this.)

And here’s another fun piece, a set of maps that’s been floating around facebook. Crimea isn’t really “naturally” a part of Ukraine. Besides which, Crimea was historically the Tartar’s homeland, until Stalin uprooted them all and relocated ethnic Russians there.

So imagine that Russia hadn’t invaded Crimea to create new facts on the ground, but that, instead, the Russian majority in the province had agitated for autonomy from an increasingly-Ukrainian Ukraine. What then? What would the justification have been for denying their aspirations?

Really, so far as I know, there are no established principles of when a secessionist movement is declared legitimate, and when not so. Clearly, you’ve got situations like the pending independence vote in Scotland, in which the U.K. has said it’ll abide by the result, whatever it is. But we’ve got Kosovo, and South Sudan, and East Timor, which were hardly voluntary and peaceful. The Wikipedia history of East Timor says in the introductory paragraph that Indonesia ceded control in 1999, and only afterwards tells us that this was after a long war for independence subsequent to Indonesia’s occupying the country in 1975, following Portugese abandonment of its former colony. (I couldn’t really tell whether Indonesia had a historical claim or invaded purely out of conquest.)

But even with respect to Scotland, the EU has already said that Scotland wouldn’t be welcome, lest their secession encourage others. And then there are situations like Somaliland in Somalia, a secessionist movement which isn’t being recognized.

For that matter, consider the American Civil War. What justification, really, was there in forcing the Southern states to remain in the Union? Why not let them go their own way? It’s almost inconceivable — and I’ll bet your gut reaction, dear reader, is likely, “but if they had succeeded, then slavery never would have ended!” — but the rationale at the time was not, “they must stay in the Union so that, when the time is right, we can end slavery.” And now, the revisionist claim is generally that the Civil War was not about slavery at all, but solely about preserving the Union — which I generally disagree with precisely because there had to have been a reason for the preservation of the Union to have been worth so many lives.

So, anyway, is the reason why some secessionist movements are acceptable to the International Community and some not, is a determination that a given secessionist group consists of Good People, and another one doesn’t, with bonus points if you’ve been oppressed in the past?

Does it matter whether the secessionist province is wholly united in its desire for independence, or somewhat less so? What if Crimea were not 50% Russian (25% Ukrainian, the rest Tartar and “other”), but 75% or 90%? Majority rules or supermajority? And what of an ethnic minority split between multiple countries — the Kurds, for instance? Could we permit or should we demand redrawing the map to more clearly place ethnic groups in neat national boundaries? In that sense, the comparisons to the Anschluss are mistaken — we’re really speaking more of the Sudetenland, Hitler’s demand that the German part of Czechoslovakia be united to Germany. And let’s not forget the ethnic cleansing post-war: the mass numbers of ethnic Germans expelled from Poland, Hungary, Romania, and Yugoslovia in the name of ensuring they wouldn’t make trouble; and Stalin expelling Poles from the portion of prewar Poland that the USSR held onto, which now became part of Ukraine — plus other instances in which ethnic groups were moved into an area to create “facts on the ground” such as China moving Han Chinese into Tibet and other ethnic minority areas.

So I’m not offering any pat answers. There aren’t any, and I’m hugely skeptical of a politician that asserts there are.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

February 28, 2014

The 43% obesity drop? Maybe not.

Next Post

March 2, 2014 Why "religious freedom restoration" is not Jim Crow

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Actuarial/Retirement Issues Politics Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 December 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 August 2021 June 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What was the primary method of food preservation in Biblical times?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Salting Drying Pickling Smoking