I have yet to hear a good explanation from anyone on the left or right of the aisle, why exactly we should not have a good relationship with Russia.
The typical response seems to be that Putin is a "killer" or otherwise morally decrepit, which sounds faintly ridiculous given that high morals have never been much of a requirement for friendship with the United States. If it did, the Saudi Arabias and the Mao Zedongs of the world would never have found a kindred soul in us.
The other argument advanced is Russian aggression in the Ukraine and Georgia. True, such aggression has happened, but then the Russian point of view is that after the Cold War the West relentlessly advanced NATO right up to the Russian border. That was hardly a friendly thing to do. It was a typical American short-term policy that eventually blew up. After all, Kennedy was practically ready to destroy the world in a nuclear holocaust because the Soviets dared to place missiles in Cuba. Why wouldn't the Russians be a bit upset about NATO expanding all the way up to Eastern Europe?
Also, if truth be said, we did help topple the democratically elected government of Victor Yanukyovich in Ukraine through the "Euromaidan" protest movement. Our very own John McCain was right there, yelling "we are with you" to the protesters. Not only that, there is even some truth to the Russian assertion that at least some of the pro-western Ukrainians are semi-fascist. Ukraine has a complicated history, divided between Russian and European leaning factions. An extreme example, that frames Ukraine's split is that during WWII a good number of the Nazi SS were Ukrainian soldiers (the "Galician" division) from the European-leaning side, while a spirited Moscow-backed resistance raged at the same time. Is Ukraine really something we need to be fighting about with Russia? Or should we just say "it's complicated"?
So what's left? Russian support for Syria and Iran? Ah, Iran. That's another holy cow for our foreign policy establishment. Iran is opposed to ISIS for God's sake, relatively democratic and less fundamentalist than our pal, Saudi Arabia! Anyway, we are demonstrably not too holy to deal with murderous regimes.
In the recent past what gets Democrats is that Russia interfered in our election. Well, they did, most likely. But interference in elections all over the world is something that both Russia and the US have done for decades, including each others, as this article points out. Maybe its time to start burying the hatchet.
Now that Michael Flynn has been kicked out for inappropriate contacts with Russians (how suggestive!), it looks as if the establishment is re-asserting its anti-Russia policy and we could be back to square zero in terms of pointless enmity with Vladimir Putin.
Sadly, going forward, it may only be our orange President and the positively terrifying Stephen Bannon who have the right idea regarding our relationship with Russia. The liberals and the conservatives are busy enjoying their mutual mud-fest.
The typical response seems to be that Putin is a "killer" or otherwise morally decrepit, which sounds faintly ridiculous given that high morals have never been much of a requirement for friendship with the United States. If it did, the Saudi Arabias and the Mao Zedongs of the world would never have found a kindred soul in us.
The other argument advanced is Russian aggression in the Ukraine and Georgia. True, such aggression has happened, but then the Russian point of view is that after the Cold War the West relentlessly advanced NATO right up to the Russian border. That was hardly a friendly thing to do. It was a typical American short-term policy that eventually blew up. After all, Kennedy was practically ready to destroy the world in a nuclear holocaust because the Soviets dared to place missiles in Cuba. Why wouldn't the Russians be a bit upset about NATO expanding all the way up to Eastern Europe?
Also, if truth be said, we did help topple the democratically elected government of Victor Yanukyovich in Ukraine through the "Euromaidan" protest movement. Our very own John McCain was right there, yelling "we are with you" to the protesters. Not only that, there is even some truth to the Russian assertion that at least some of the pro-western Ukrainians are semi-fascist. Ukraine has a complicated history, divided between Russian and European leaning factions. An extreme example, that frames Ukraine's split is that during WWII a good number of the Nazi SS were Ukrainian soldiers (the "Galician" division) from the European-leaning side, while a spirited Moscow-backed resistance raged at the same time. Is Ukraine really something we need to be fighting about with Russia? Or should we just say "it's complicated"?
So what's left? Russian support for Syria and Iran? Ah, Iran. That's another holy cow for our foreign policy establishment. Iran is opposed to ISIS for God's sake, relatively democratic and less fundamentalist than our pal, Saudi Arabia! Anyway, we are demonstrably not too holy to deal with murderous regimes.
In the recent past what gets Democrats is that Russia interfered in our election. Well, they did, most likely. But interference in elections all over the world is something that both Russia and the US have done for decades, including each others, as this article points out. Maybe its time to start burying the hatchet.
Now that Michael Flynn has been kicked out for inappropriate contacts with Russians (how suggestive!), it looks as if the establishment is re-asserting its anti-Russia policy and we could be back to square zero in terms of pointless enmity with Vladimir Putin.
Sadly, going forward, it may only be our orange President and the positively terrifying Stephen Bannon who have the right idea regarding our relationship with Russia. The liberals and the conservatives are busy enjoying their mutual mud-fest.
