Three Reasons Why Putin Laughs At Impotent America

[Purveyor]

Deliberations at the current NATO summit in Wales may or may not produce a reduction in tensions over Ukraine. But one thing is certain: irrespective of how the stand-off is eventually resolved, Vladimir Putin will emerge with his reputation powerfully enhanced. Basically Putin is the new Napoleon, and the Ukraine crisis is his diplomatic Austerlitz: he will keep Crimea and will considerably enhance the ability of Russian-speaking minorities in Ukraine’s eastern provinces to stand up to Kiev. (Even the Economist magazine, one of Putin’s fiercest critics, concedes as much. Click here for a commentary just posted at the Economist’s site.)

As for Barack Obama’s reputation, don’t ask. A Google search this morning for “Obama + wimp” produced more than a million hits. Nothing that he and his aides are likely to achieve in Wales will do much to improve his image.

Yet Obama’s critics are fundamentally wrong in blaming his impotence on personal failings. The problem is not Obama; it is America. Over the last sixty years, and in particular over the last thirty, America has thrown away almost all the once vast leverage it enjoyed to set the global diplomatic agenda. In doing so, America acted in the name of an idealistic cause, globalism, but at the end of the day its idealism has not been reciprocated. Even America’s ostensibly closest allies are now prepared more or less at will to flout America’s wishes (even if they often pay sincere-sounding lip service to American objectives). As I have pointed out previously, even such an ostensibly deferential ally as South Korea is not prepared to support Obama’s sanctions. Japan meanwhile has sounded at best only lukewarm – understandably so because before the crisis blew up it had come close to resolving a territorial dispute with Russia that had festered for nearly 70 years. (In February the Japanese and Russians announced they would hold a summit on the dispute in October or November and as recently as late August Tokyo did not demur when Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announced the summit was still on.) Then there is China, which is openly making hay out of the crisis and can be expected to provide a sort of underground railroad in shipping vital Japanese and Korean producers’ goods to Russia.

It requires just a moment’s reflection to remember why America’s diplomatic clout once loomed so large – and why that clout has now almost disappeared. Three reasons in particular explain the sea change:

1. Production technology. Almost right across the industrial waterfront, the United States once led the world in production technology. This positioned it as a sort of industrial fairy godmother courted by countless other nations desperate to boost their productivity with transfers of America’s more efficient industrial knowhow. Things are different now. The problem is that if you don’t produce much, you don’t have much production technology. Any nation that seeks transfers of the most advanced production technology these days must go elsewhere, most notably to Japan and Germany (ironically these two nations owe their leadership in large part to their earlier skill in winkling world-beating technologies out of the United States).

more...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/eamonnfingleton/2014/09/04/three-reasons-why-putin-laughs-at-impotent-u-s/?partner=yahootix

[Fred Sanders]

1. Why the RW talking points in DU? From RW media?

[Purveyor]

2. All points of view should be considered. I get the same flack when I post

articles from Ria Novosti, RT, Xinhua, 927mag, Ma'an, etc. so I must be a 'right wing troll, eh Fred?

[mazzarro]

3. No it is not!

Ready the article first.

[KoKo]

6. Fred..here is the Author of Article's Bio & he's Not RW:

Eamonn Fingleton

A former editor for Forbes and the Financial Times, Eamonn Fingleton spent 27 years monitoring East Asian economics from a base in Tokyo. In September 1987 he issued the first of several predictions of the Tokyo banking crash and went on in "Blindside," a controversial 1995 analysis that was praised by John Kenneth Galbraith and Bill Clinton, to show that a heedless America was fast losing its formerly vaunted leadership in advanced manufacturing -- and particularly in so-called producers' goods -- to Japan.

His 1999 book "In Praise of Hard Industries: Why Manufacturing, Not the Information Economy, Is the Key to Future Prosperity" anticipated the American Internet stock crash of 2000 and offered an early warning about the abuse of new financial instruments. In his 2008 book "In the Jaws of the Dragon: America’s Fate in the Coming Era of Chinese Hegemony," he challenged the conventional view that China is converging to Western economic and political values. His books have been translated into French, Russian, Korean, Japanese, and Chinese. They have been read into the U.S. Senate record and named among the ten best business books of the year by Business Week and Amazon.com.

[Ash_F]

7. The article is basically entirely a slam of globalization. /nt

[poster123]

4. What RW? Left Coast has open eyes too

Last edited Fri Sep 5, 2014, 03:16 AM - Edit history (1)

The article presents refreshing insights, even if tainted by simplistic analysis. Prewar Japan had probably better technology and literacy than post-depression America, what I've judged from years looking at the topic from many sides; importing Deming's concepts which led to 1800 full time inspectors (1936) at the Hawthorne plant is, for example, somehting I consider more foolish than world beating. Yes I have beat the Japanese at their "magical production" game; in reality, easy because they're stuck with rigid organizations with inflexible top down planning and comparatively nerdy, eggheaded, think inside the box technicians I loathed to associate with on a personal level.For another, Chevron spent 80 million for a new tower for El Segundo in 1980, and lord only knows how much spent in 10years plus installing it; Shell had a cracking process in Borneo prior to the invasion. RW or LW, Chevron did not invent neither petroleum refining nor environmental concern(possibly feel-good advertising? Could TEPCO operate in any US state?)
My point is not to simply criticize. I earnestly believe that for our RW, right through those who celebrate May Day, right into DC, Putin is associated with old-world thinking where there are pepole at the top nobody kids themselves about; China finally exposed Mao for a child molesting monster, but there's no need to dig the Chernobyl or KGB background up for obviously goldbricking Mr P. Obama's twin successes, let bigots make fools of themselves and no, no Curtis LeMay for South China Sea issues, are welcome breaks from the mindless Bechtel/ iran contra (Thather) years which I, like many others, detested. For the author of the piece posted "Vladimir Putin will emerge with his reputation powerfully enhanced." I just can't believe it. From the Economist's article mentioned, "Even the most purblind now know him for what he is: less a statesman than a brigand, not a partner but a foe." They made my point: Putin on his high horse waving his own flag. Suppose they gave a war and nobody came.

[KoKo]

5. This is interesting from "Reason #2:"

Ironically among the most publicized of the Obama administration’s sanctions on Russia is that many major Russian corporations are being denied access to American capital markets. As a slap on the wrist, this is about effective as denying a resident of the Amazon rainforest access to the water resources of the Sahara desert. The fact is that Russia exported a net $75 billion of capital last year and much of that was invested in U.S. Treasury bonds. Meanwhile America’s net capital imports totaled $361 billion. It is the United States that needs Russian capital, not the other way around.

Of course, to some observers the key issue is that Russian corporations are now denied the “financial engineering skills” of the likes of Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Citigroup. This might make sense if Putin respected Wall Street. In reality he likely regards American investment banks with about as much warmth as the Great Lakes power station industry regards the current infestation of zebra mussels. Basically the Obama administration is doing Putin’s work in getting the Wall Street pests out of Russia’s hair. If Putin were to sell Russia’s holdings of U.S. Treasuries he could put significant pressure on both the dollar and U.S. interest rates. His power to cause financial trouble is one reason the East Asians feel the need to placate him. Although he is not central to their effort to keep the dollar propped up, any move by him to exit the dollar would make it harder for the East Asians to keep their currencies from going through the roof.

[Igel]

8. The problem is simple fear.

They can't read others. They're culturally blind.

It would have blown over quickly and with a small flare-up of violence, then gone away. Had a different course of action been taken. But in fear over having any violence, they dragged out things until the amount of violence needed to deal with the problem still hasn't been achieved. In order to avoid a bloody nose, things escalated until it's a minor bloodbath. By ruling out force as a part of the solution to the problem, they made it a large part of any solution that doesn't essentially say, "Yes, sir; may I have another beating, sir?"

This situation has been replete with Putin's dipping the toe in the water and testing conditions. And step by step, the West has told Putin that it won't do anything. "Really? What if I do this?" "Yes, sir, even if you do this, we won't do anything except discuss sanctions and impose sanctions that you can handle." "And if I do this over here? Really, you still won't do *anything* serious?" "No, sir. Even if you do that, we still won't do anything you think is serious. We will talk and make loud noises, pat ourselves on the back as others die, and say that we've handled the problem. You lose." "But I'm winning. If I do this new thing, you'll do nothing again?" "Precisely, because our victory lies in doing nothing. If we do something, we may do something stupid. Doing something requires a strategy. If we do nothing, we can have no strategy and not do anything stupid."

And in the end the West looks like ineffectual idiots. The strategy is whatever it accidentally is; and stupid things abound. But they can deny having done the stupid things, and that's the goal.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

10. there likely wouldn't even have been any problems(if my memory is accurate)

had the EU not been stubborn back when they first offered the austerity/economic deal to try and convince Ukraine into their economic zone, the obvious Russian reaction to that action was to offer a 'sweeter' deal aka basically less restrictions and a few incentives.

Ukraine i believe suggested a three way agreement of sorts with Russia being willing to accept/consider that but the EU response was more along the lines of the 'No, its them or us' attitude(which in my eyes almost always ends up with the one put on the spot going 'Ok, I'll go with them' which is what happened at the time).

Had the EU accepted then Ukraine would most likely have avoided any trouble as in Putin's mind it would have remained 'neutral-ish' which is what he/Russia wanted(from my limited understanding of their mindset.)

[Populist_Prole]

9. Surprising seeing a read like that from Forbes

Like another poster said; it was basically laying the decline of US projection at globalisms feet. Again, surprsing coming from a 'pub like that. True as it is, expect the plutocrats to exhort for the US to do even more of the same of what hollowed out US economic power. So on that noye, it's a wash.

[Demeter]

11. Putin is the only adult in the room

He can deal with reality, including the reality that his counterparts are economic morons: EU, US, even Canada, under the sway of Globalism, PNAC and the Chicago school of economics.

All of them trying to outdo the others in ass-licking, so as to be elevated into the ranks of the 1% Elitists, if only in the next generation, like Chelsea Clinton.

the 1% are so sharp, they are going to cut their own throats. Indeed, they already have.

[Purveyor]

12. Indeed. Thank you for the comments. eom

[geek tragedy]

13. Putin can barely win a war in east Ukraine. If he is left to boast about beating

up a helpless opponent that used to bend the knee to Moscow, well that says it all about what Russia is and will always be--a regional bully feared locally but respected nowhere.

The US at its height of imperial power was never able to break Ukraine from Moscow's orbit.

Only Putin achieved that.

[Purveyor]

14. That is some funny stuff you are posting, indeed. Comedy hour, perhaps? All

good. Gave me a hardy {{{chuckle}}} indeed.