New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

rshowalter - 05:10pm Sep 3, 2001 EST (#8390 of 8395)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Great coverage:

The Fortunes of Russia and China, as Told Through the Pages of The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/20010902mag-china-russia.html

rshowalter - 07:20pm Sep 3, 2001 EST (#8391 of 8395)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Sharon to Seek Putin Help to End Mideast Violence by REUTERS http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-mideast-russia-sharon.html

If Putin could assist here, especially in coordination with the EU -- what a contribution that would be to world peace, and to Russia's own interests.

Sharon would have to be convinced to find a workable solution that made both practical and emotional sense to both sides.

Arafat would have to be convinced to do the same.

. . . .

Problems with military imbalances, world wide, at their worst, and something about the explosive instability of current patterns, are represented in the Israel - Palestine mess-tragedy - travesty - farce.

Perhaps the exact same arguments made by George Tenant and Co could be better accepted, or could be modified proactively, by Putin, a representative of a power with more ability to function even-handedly, than by Tenant, who must unavoidably be seen by Palestinians as an Israeli advocate.

From the article:

" The Mitchell plan has failed to take effect and a cease-fire agreed by both sides with U.S. Central Intelligence Agency Director George Tenet in June is in tatters."

" Palestinians expect no major progress from Sharon's talks in Moscow, but a Palestinian delegation is expected in Russia later this week to discuss the outcome of Sharon's visit.

If Putin could do something useful here, it would be serious leverage on matters of nuclear balances. With respect to the US, the EU, and the whole world.

I don't know whether the leverage could be of use dealing with President Putin's concerns. But it could adress some of almarst's concerns. Concerns that have been discussed at length on this thread.

One thing, I believe, ought to be clear. Some facts need to be straight.

Fictions, on key matters, in VERY complex and multiply connected circumstances, with emotions running high, are dangerous.

The facts may be hard enough to deal with. But for a framing that can work , nothing else can possibly do as well as the truth. Nobody has to like the truth, necessarily, or "make a big thing of it."

But when complicated decisions about the future have to be made well, people have to know what the truth is. Because they need answers that will work.

rshowalter - 07:45pm Sep 3, 2001 EST (#8392 of 8395)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

TIME cover story: IS HE THE ODD MAN OUT?

TIME Magazine cover: http://a740.g.akamai.net/f/740/606/1d/image.pathfinder.com/time/images/covers/cover0910.gif

http://a740.g.akamai.net/f/740/606/1d/image.pathfinder.com/time/daily/2001/0109/powell0902.jpg photograph of SECRETARY OF STATE COLIN POWELL by TIMOTHY GREENFIELD-SANDERS

"Colin Powell is a global eminence. Yet on the Bush foreign policy team, his star somehow shines less brightly than expected. TIME's Johanna McGeary profiles the the internationalist among the unilateralists." http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101010910-173441,00.html

Maybe Powell is being "wise" within his limits -- hanging back, when a situation is beyond his control, as his administration goes slam-banging into disaster. For myself, that seems reasonable, because of some (slightly indirect) interactions I had with the last Secretary of State, Madelaine Albright. ( Personally, this was a wrenching story -- one the Gods of Olympus might find funny, though I didn't. I'm cut off from the Guardian, and if I wasn't I'd have a better reference on this matter which involved the husband of one of CNN's star reporters, and perhaps advice from the current nominee for Chairman of the Joint Chiefes of Staff.)

If the Secretary of State has to defend fictions, then the Secretary of State is in a difficult job.

from the archive: THE POWELL FACTOR ... The polls show he could win the presidency. But is he bold enough to go for the top job and take on the political establishment? by JOHN F. STACKS http://www.time.com/time/magazine/archive/1995/950710/950710.cover.html

It is in the interest of the United States, from any reasonable long-term perspective at all, to check some technical facts and some background. I would think that, from the perspective of the Secretary of State, that should be clear. Because, by the nature of his job, he knows how much the credibility of the United States matters. As of now, the United States is being besmirched. I feel that he should fix it. This is something, I should think, that he and Putin ought to agree on.

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense