No,
really, this would have been really funny if not for it being utterly pathetic.
Now, after US mainstream media and pundits' utter crushing defeat,
Harlan Ullman tries to weigh in on what he
pretends to understand--Russia.
The guy, who, evidently, is very big on
doctrine-mongering, frames this "urgent" need in this way:
"As a consequence, it is only
relatively recently that greater analysis of Russian intentions has reawakened
following the intervention in Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea in 2014,
last year's sortie into Syria and Moscow's increasingly harsh rhetoric of
intimidation. At the NATO summits in Wales in 2014 and in Warsaw this year, the
alliance took military steps to respond to Russian aggressive actions through
enhancing deterrence and reassuring allies particularly on both flanks and on
the eastern borders. The reality is, however, that these decisions were made
less on a thorough analysis of Russian strengths, weaknesses and
vulnerabilities and more on Cold War concepts of responding in kind with
military solutions."
There is a Russian proverb which
states that if the person is dead--this is for a long time, but if a person is
an idiot--it is eternal. In one sense Ullman is right though. US doesn't have
and, arguably, never had any serious Russian study field. Bar some few
exceptions, what went under American "Russian Studies" was reduced to
pushing some expedient ideas (US "elites" seem to be, unlike
Russians, utterly obsessed with GULAG, as an example) and, indeed, was reduced
to Kremlinology, not the study of real Russian culture and history. Fact is,
Russian history, especially that of the XX century, has been reduced to
caricature and memes in which the "culture" and "history"
of narrow strata of Soviet/Russian pro-Western dissidents, their
"vision" of Russia, very often completely detached from the reality,
has been substituted for the real thing. It couldn't have been otherwise,
especially in the XX century, where realities of the two European Wars and of
the Soviet period of Russian history completely escaped those in grossly
overrated American Russia's "academe" and analytic organizations
ranging from intelligence to think-tanks. US has plenty of Kremlinologists,
what it doesn't have is the knowledge of Russia and, judging by this Ullman's
piece, probably will not have it in the nearest future--there is a reason for
that of which I will tell later. This little blog of mine for the last two
years was documenting an utter failure of all those proverbial US and
"Western" Kremlinologists to find their own ass in brightly lit room,
let alone forecast or correctly assess the events in and around Russia. Nowhere
this utter failure manifested itself more profoundly than in their tedious,
unimaginative, incompetent and hubris, or, otherwise, barely hidden complex of
inferiority, stricken "analysis" of Russian military. This whole American
Russia "establishment" should be fired the same way as everyone in US
mainstream media should--these guys helped to bring the United States to the
verge of war with Russia. This whole establishment is struck with a disease
which prevented and will continue to prevent them from seeing the world for
what it is. This disease is American exceptionalism.
Let's hope that with the new day
dawning in the United States after Trump's victory, we all may finally get to
the facts, not bullshit of "making own reality", of how world operates
and maybe, just maybe, the necessary arrangements for more secure and
prosperous world could be made. There is no rational reason for American and
Russian peoples (US "state" is a separate matter) to be enemies and
if Mr. Ullman thinks that he has what it takes to consult on Russia, he may
start by learning real Russian history, culture and attitudes to warfare and maybe
he will admit to himself that most of what he knows about Russia is crap. I
doubt he will, though. In the end, the guy still thinks that:
"The results of these
analyses should be made available in a Wikipedia-type online service in order
to inform and expand public debate on Russia. What has singularly plagued
the United States in the past has been the failure to understand and gain the
knowledge necessary to prevail over an adversary. Vietnam and the
second Iraq War underscore the tragic consequences of, as the great Chinese
Gen. Sun Tzu warned, "not knowing the enemy."
If he thinks that he is going to
fight Russia and win just by learning about her I may only recall Sir Bernard
Pares' prescient quote:
"And
knowledge alone is not enough without understanding, which is much more hardly
won. To no country does this apply more
than to Russia....This gap has to be filled, or will it cost us dear."(c) It almost did.
Disclaimer: If anyone will misconstrue this
post of mine as some kind of "offering an alternative" on an official
level to whatever organization or person--wrong. Not interested, even for a
good money. I love my job and down to earth lifestyle and prefer to remain
independent in my assessments of the outside world. At least I am not wrong all
the time;-)
