Golly, what an opportunity for Ms. Condi to talk about American "leadership" in the world!

Posted by: sglover at October 13, 2007 12:30 AM | Permalink to this comment

When the nuclear materials that Russia has been supplying the Iranians gets in the hands of the Chechens, and they detonate
some device in Sevastopol or Donetsk; we'll cool our heels too.

Posted by: narciso at October 13, 2007 04:39 PM | Permalink to this comment

Henry Kissinger actually did receive this kind of treatment when attempting to negotiate with Soviet leaders, and describes it in detail in his memoirs.

The public lecture in front of the media is different, but then the Soviets didn't like to have the media around much. The thing to remember is that Putin is unlikely to have acted this way on a personal whim; he would have been trying to accomplish something, and we should make sure we understand clearly what that was.

The perception that part of what he is trying to accomplish is to capitalize on America's weakened international position is probably correct. Like it or not, our international position really is weakened at the moment, and we have to expect reactions to that fact from other governments. The Russian reaction is actually easier to predict than that of other countries, just because we have such a long history with them.

I regret that the occasion for all this was an American proposal about missile defense facilities in Eastern Europe. I've felt for years that missile defense was a giant fiscal rat hole, a fine idea if we could make it work that we haven't been able to make work in over 20 years. I haven't seen any indication that this is likely to change, and other things being equal I would prefer to argue with the Russians in situations where winning the argument actually did us some good.

Posted by: Zathras at October 14, 2007 09:05 PM | Permalink to this comment

Well yes, I can imagine it, hell I remember it! The simple fact of the matter is that good faith doesn't enter into diplomacy (soi disant). Eighteen month of negotiation to settle the size nad shape of the negotiating table (Kissinger in 'Nam) is ust a taste of the obscurantist method.

That Ms.Rice was so insulted I completely understand - she is after all therre to represent the US government ,but Bill Gates? He controls an economy larger than the USSWere ever was!

Putin is in the odd situation of trying to pick a fight when no-one takes him seriously.

That bit about "preparing for a threat that has not yet materialized " is disengenuous at best, and baldfaced lying in a more real perspective.

(Spit)

Posted by: Ktel60 at October 15, 2007 05:34 AM | Permalink to this comment

z--i think i've read all of kissinger's memoirs (admitedly a while ago) but should have them at home still. can you point me to a passage or two re: similar treatment so i can take a peek in next day or so? thx, gd

Posted by: greg djerejian at October 15, 2007 04:59 PM | Permalink to this comment

Greg, see "White House Years," Chapter 28, on the 1972 Moscow Summit, and "Years of Upheaval," Chapter 7, for Brezhnev's visit to the United States the following year.

For good measure see Dean Acheson's contemptuous remarks about the "new school of offensive Soviet diplomats" toward the end of Chapter 3 of "Present at the Creation" as well as his description of Andrei Vishinsky's boorishness at the 1951 UN General Assembly in Paris, early in Chapter 60.

Russian disregard for the boundaries of protocol and good taste are Vladimir Putin's inheritance, not his invention -- which should not obscure the point about the impaired international position of the United States at the moment that you make in the main post, nor the grim hopelessness of the administration's choice to engage with Russia on putting missile defense sites in Eastern Europe. Most especially it should not obscure that Putin, who is no one's fool, has objectives of his own that go beyond reacting to what he hears from American officials.

Posted by: Zathras at October 16, 2007 12:45 AM | Permalink to this comment