An Unstable World? Part One: Russia

Some folks have lately asked why I seem so calm, when every week brings news of yet another brewing disaster, with the world apparently spinning into chaos.  So much for Francis Fukayama's famous line - around 1990 - that the rapid and unstoppable spread of liberal democracy would soon bring an "end of history."

A few years earlier, I had made a different prediction. That the Cold War and the communist empire would soon shatter... (few believed it even remotely possible)... but that our struggles would thereupon move on to strife between a rising world-liberal culture... and one branch or another of machismo... traditionally male dominated cultures upset over the prospect of seeing their women become like ours.

At the time, I could not say which it would be... Latin, Hindi or Muslim machismo, though I guessed the lattermost of these. With the saving grace that - thereupon - the other two would swing our way.

But never mind that. Lately I've heard a lot of: "Brin, you warned us, way back a year ago, that 2014 could be world-shaking! You said the last three centuries began in their fourteenth year! Aren't these ructions around the planet signs that you're right?"

Well... yes... perhaps.  But here's how to tell when someone really is in the future biz.  He doesn't wed his ego to any one forecast! Or any twenty! I am in the line of posing possibilities to explore. Being proved right? I'll leave that for others to judge.

In fact, looking at the crises of the moment, I have not yet broken a sweat. Maybe I'll tell you why, later in this series.  But first, some specific trouble zones.

== What's up with Russia? ==

Fascinating! The pro-Russian rebels in Donetsk and Luhansk (eastern Ukraine) are resurrecting Soviet symbols, incantations and methods, even collective farms -- and (as described in this article) the same thing was happening in other disputed territories like South Ossetia and Abkhazia. 

We already know that Russian President Vladimir Putin -- a former official in the very-communist KGB -- called the breakup of the USSR "History's greatest tragedy." But... but... he's also supervised the most spectacular rise in oligarchic-moneyed inequality since the days of Ivan the Terrible. So... what gives?

I have to tell you that I lay 30% odds that Vladimir may turn out to be something that almost no one on Earth suspects. Sincere. And faithful (deep down) to the memes of his youth.

I may be alone in thinking that is possible -- on a "minority" or three-to-one wager. But lonely observations are what I do.

(Another example. Why does no one even consider what I deem a 20% possibility: that the absolutely uniform chain of destructive-to-America outcomes from the GW Bush presidency might have been deliberate or "manchurian"? I only give the possibility 1:5 odds, despite it being the only explanation that fits all facts. Indeed, it does parsimoniously fit all Bush Administration outcomes, far better than the standard theories: dogmatism, venality and stupidity. But the truly curious thing is that absolutely no one will discuss a lesser-odds option, even just to have it on a corner of the table.  But... back to Putin.)

What do I mean by sincere? Ah, well, if you ever actually read Karl Marx (which I assume no member of my generation has ever done), you'd realize how easily the present situation in Russia is "adaptable" in Marxist-Leninist terms. So, a couple of hundred oligarchs have consolidated all wealth, capital and power in a few hands? That is actually a well-described Marxist phase. The penultimate pre-revolutionary phase. When the time comes... 

...but I will leave that as a what-if hint. Remember, I only laid a 30% on this one. But it fits.

Of course, there are other Russia-related items, like the effects of plummeting oil prices. But the most important from our perspective is... our perspective.

== We talk ourselves into idiocy ==

Take the utter love fest for Vladimir Putin that surges across America's right wing media, especially Beck, Limbaugh and Fox.  "If only we had strong and savvy leadership like that!" The fellow is shown shirtless on Fox more often than a Playboy centerfold.

To listen to our media... both right and left... Putin is a master player who has won round after round against the feckless democratic leaders of the West, especially Barack Obama.  After all, he grabbed Crimea, only suffering some sanctions as a result.  And now he has nibbled off portions of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions as quasi-Marxist-Russian enclaves with considerable autonomy from Kiev.  Spectacular gamesmanship!

Except... um... am I the only one who's noticed that, in the last year, Putin ... lost Ukraine?  What had been an almost wholly-owned satrapy of over forty million skilled people, with vast resources, turned decisively westward. Does that fact weigh on anyone's scales?

To be clear, Putin himself kvetched that this revolution was the direct result of western/european/american scheming. So why do his admirers in US media not take him at his word?

If european/american governments, led by Barack Obama did scheme/support/facilitate the westward swing of 90% of Ukraine, it was a geopolitical coup of stunning aggressiveness and effectiveness, about which the Kremlin could do little more than whine a bit, and nibble-back a few crusts where the population was overwhelmingly Russian in background, and clearly preferred Putin's land.

And... your complaint about all this... is? 

It is like the mad-right proclaiming hatred of the "socialist George Soros, who is so scary he toppled 8 foreign governments!" Never mentioning which foreign governments the Fox/Beck/Limbaugh nuremberg rally credits the lefty Soros with toppling.   

Likewise, amid what seems a huge victory for the west (if you insist on viewing a simple act of self-determination by Ukrainians in such primitive terms), all these propagandists and their cretinous viewers can do is focus on a few nibble-back "defeats."

Truly, we live awash in silliness.

Oh, one last item.  Look up this fellow: Fyodor Dmitrievich Berezin is a Ukrainian science fiction writer. In the Ukraine Civil War he currently serves as the deputy Defense Minister  of the People's Republic of Donetsk.  His sci fi always features virtuous Russian or revived Soviet forces destroying decadent-smug American hegemons.  Wowzer.

== So where's the optimism? ==

Sorry, not this time. You'll have to wait for me to plumb the "ISIS-Crisis." And the endless disappointments between Israel and Palestine. And Ebola! 

And so many other modern ructions that make it seem that I was right about the "fourteenth year."

Well, sure... I might be right.  Or I might be crazy.

But I am starting to perk up a bit, imagining that... I might be wrong.  

== Continue to Part II: China

Louisiana suffers for W's "elective surgery"

As we watch poor Louisiana wallow in misery, I am moved to point out two things. (1) that there are eerily predictive passages about New Orleans in my novel EARTH... and (2) here’s the first state to face a major civil emergency while much of its National Guard has been yanked away to some foreign land.

This is yet another way to view the foolishness of our leaders. Their inability to really consider that the world is dangerous. Here’s a way to put it: the metaphor for this Iraq War should be ELECTIVE SURGERY.

At first, we were urgently told it was an EMERGENCY ROOM PROCEDURE, back during the lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction. No time to talk, or plan or persuade allies, or ponder the most efficient means of achieving desired ends. If we did not act fast, Saddam would fry our babies!

See: Wars of Emergency vs Wars of Policy

Now we are told that reason never mattered, after all. The real purpose was always to liberate oppressed people and spread freedom.

Yes, I happen to be one of the few war critics who AGREE with that motive! (In fact, I feel we were morally obligated to free the people of Iraq from a monster that we fostered long ago, and that these same morons left in charge, way back in 91, when they had him in the palm of their hands. In effect, they told Saddam - “go ahead and do whatever you like to these people who trusted us to come rescue them.” It was the worst stain on our honor in 100 years.)

Indeed, I actually agree with the backup excuse. Yes indeedy, let’s spread freedom by toppling Saddam.

Still, there is a fundamental distinction that NONE of our pundits pointed out. This worthy goal was no emergency. We could have taken our time and come up with a calm, skilled, clever plan, relying upon skilled professionals who had already proved themselves in the Balkans and Afghanistan...

... a plan that did NOT involve rampant poitical meddling and graft, dividing a great nation, spurning allies, ripping reservists away from jobs and families and pouring billions down a rathole of grinding insurgency-attrition while failing utterly at nation building. With the only winners being the Saudfamily and Iran.

(Hey, go check out the readiness of your own state’s national guard. Then imagine your state’s vulnerabilities. We Californians get quakes, not subject to global warming. How poetical that the South will be ravaged by climate change induced storms.)

Afghanistan was urgent... an emergency room procedure... and yet, a plan was already in place. W had only time to shout “go!” and the same doctrines that Wesley Clarke used in Kosovo went into smooth operation. The urgent operation went well... and the elective surgery has turned into a nightmare as we bleed on the table because of wretched planning and politician-meddling.

Sigh. And now, meanwhile, back to the Great Purge...

See: The Real War of G.W. Bush : Against the U.S. Military

Army Contract Official Critical of Halliburton Pact Is Demoted A top Army contracting official who criticized a large, noncompetitive contract with the Halliburton Company for work in Iraq was demoted Saturday for what the Army called poor job performance. The official, Bunnatine H. Greenhouse, has worked in military procurement for 20 years and for the past several years had been the chief overseer of contracts at the Army Corps of Engineers, the agency that has managed much of the reconstruction work in Iraq. ...

Ms. Greenhouse's lawyer, Michael Kohn, called the action an "obvious reprisal" for the strong objections she raised in 2003 to a series of corps decisions involving the Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root, which has garnered more than $10 billion for work in Iraq. Dick Cheney led Halliburton, which is based in Texas, before he became vice president.

Finally...

see a couple places where moderates have proposed alternatives to the current "stay the course" vs. "cut and run" dichotomy. Both seem reasonable and are
probably compatible -- both could be done simultaneously.They are:

"The Way Out of Iraq: Decentralizing the Iraqi Government"

and "How to Win in Iraq"

These articles make sense... and they won't be implemented because the goal of the involvement in Iraq has never been success at nation building. Yes, that is officially our purpose now that there are no WMD and no Saddam. But Cheney and Rumsfeld both famously expressed contempt for "nation building" long ago and their disbelief in it still shows.

No, there are only two possible classes of hypothesis to explain such a disaster. (* Kool-aid alert! Paranoia riff about to resume! * ;-)

Hypothesis 1. Incompetence. These are moronic frat boys, using the United States and our military as personal toys. The calamity is not what was intended. It is just what happens when skilled professionals - first diplomats and then military officers - are relentlessly over-ruled by meddling politician imbecilles bent on playing war and stealing everything in sight.

Hypothesis 2. What you see is what was planned. This explanation looks utterly paranoid and I am the only one suggesting it. And that means I must disclaim that it is formally what I BELIEVE to be true. Yes, yes. Brin’s Fantasy. But it IS logically the other side of the coin. My excuse is that I am a completist and must include it.

Still, let me repeat my call for you to step aside and look from another angle. If you were enemies of the United States, and looked across our history for some weakness to exploit, what two disasters nearly ruined us? Dividing us, sapping our strength, wounding the economy, tearing down our alliances, frittering our military strength?

The Civil War and Vietnam.

Now look at last year's electoral map. And look at Iraq. And wonder... which sworn enemies of our culture have access to every powerful person in this administration?

Paranoid? yes. But reasonable people do not automatically dismiss that which fits all facts and has not been disproved. Always leave a “what-if” possibility open that what you see is exactly what somebody wanted to have happen.