Mediaboss Marketing

Theres been discussion lately whether the U.S. is spending too much money supporting Ukraine. The argument is that its likely to be long and protracted, more people will die needlessly, and Russias eventual victory is likely. Further, that money could be used to help Americans here at home who are hurting.

I think its time for a reality check.

When World War II ended, most but not all of the animosity stopped: old allies who had fought a common enemy (Nazi Germany) were suddenly at odds. Because of agreements deemed necessary during the war, the Soviet Union gained control over a huge swath of Eastern Europe and established governments sympathetic to its communist philosophy and worldview. In a sense, it was a secular religion, a deeply held set of beliefs that guide peoples lives. Part of that philosophy included the spread of communism worldwide and the eradication of capitalism as an economic force. Since the war had devastated much of Europe, national economies there were in a shambles. Communism began to look good compared to what capitalism had brought, and communist parties sprang up in many European nations. (Unfortunately, were seeing many people question capitalism these days.)

The United States responded to the potential spread of communism in several ways. There was an information campaign, in which outlets like Voice of America and Radio Free Europe transmitted shortwave radio programs around the world to counter propaganda coming out of communist nations. On the economic front, the Marshall Plan, also known as the European Recovery Program, provided over $15 billion to spur rebuilding efforts on the continent. At the same time, the U.S. sponsored the NATO alliance of North Atlantic nations to act as a military shield against potential aggression from the USSR. It was a policy of containment, in which the USSR would not be allowed to force a communist government on other nations.

When The Wall in Berlin fell and the USSR collapsed, it looked as though the Cold War was finally over. Eastern Europe had shaken off the Soviet yoke, and Russia would concentrate on rebuilding its economy from the shambles created by 70 years of inept and misguided leadership. To be fair, weve had our own share of bungles here in America. But the Cold War never really went away: it cooled down a bit for a while, as politicians and oligarchs in Russia played musical chairs with the seats of power there. Putin is now firmly in control, and KGB-trained Putin is a hard and fast Chekist, someone who believes that the national security police must dominate throughout the entire structure of a nation. Indeed, Putin has been quoted recently as saying The KGB is now at the highest levels of the [Russian] government. Putins actions in Syria, Georgia, and now Ukraine demonstrate his unwillingness to leave well enough alone: he pushes limits wherever he can, with little regard for who is hurt in the process. He has no problem engaging in scorched earth campaigns.

The Eastern European nations who joined NATO after the collapse of the Soviet Bloc werent forced into doing so: they had experienced Soviet domination for over four decades, and they want no more part of it. Poland in particular, part of my ethnic heritage (Im a second-generation American), has a long memory that includes Stalin splitting Poland between the Nazis and Russia until Hitler turned on Stalin. Among other things, Poles also remember the Katyn Massacre, in which over 20,000 Polish military personnel were killed, shot from behind by the Soviets, and buried in mass graves in the Katyn Forest. Czechs remember Soviet commandos landing in helicopters in 1968 to put down the Prague Spring, a brief turn toward democracy which the Soviets would not tolerate. Long-neutral Sweden and Finland, which shares an 800 mile long border with Russia, looked at what happened in Ukraine and quickly decided it was time to join NATO.

We cant attack Russia directly. They have nukes, lots of them, and we cant risk nuclear confrontation by a direct or even an indirect attack, although we should be prepared to remind Putin that we also have nukes lots of them as JFK reminded Khrushchev in 1962.

So, the question boils down to this: Shall we say that the efforts and treasury and lives spent in the Cold War amounted to nothing while Russia under Putin tries to break out of the containment his nation created for itself, and grab more territory? Or shall we reinforce our past efforts and continue to support Ukraine against naked aggression? The world is waiting for our answer, and that answer will play a major part in determining for them whether we are prepared to honor our commitments.

John Sukovich is a Newberry County resident and a retired professor of business and other IT courses from Midlands Technical College. Sukovich served in USAF intelligence in Berlin and Pakistan during the Cold War.

See the article here:
The costs of war, even if its cold - newberryobserver.com