Russian military sources said that Moscow is contemplating using Cuba as a refuelling base for its nuclear-bomb carrying aircraft. The move would be in retaliation for the Bush administration's plan to site a missile defense shield in Europe. . . . Russia today officially denied the report but the fact that it had appeared in a newspaper so closely affiliated with the Kremlin encouraged observers to take it seriously - if only as a way of showing Russia's anger at the US missile shield. . . . "Russia, guided by its peaceful policy, is not creating military bases at the borders of other states," Russian news agencies quoted Ilshat Baichurin, acting head of the Russian defense ministry's information department, as saying. It would seem strange for the Russian press to raise such a possibility without prior governmental consultation with Cuba. Fidel Castro, in a cryptic statement, praised his brother, Raul, for maintaining a dignified silence but neither confirmed nor denied the reports. U.S. General Schwartz commented,
Russia would cross "a red line for the United States of America" if it were to base nuclear capable bombers in Cuba, a top US air force officer warned on Tuesday.Why have Venezuela and Cuba made such offers, if they have actually done so? What's in it for them, and what could Russia gain? Although I certainly don't have the answers, I do find it interesting to speculate.
"If they did I think we should stand strong and indicate that is something that crosses a threshold, crosses a red line for the United States of America," said General Norton Schwartz, nominated to be the air force's chief of staff.
Is this just a bit of ambient noise, or something more serious? Is the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant) cabal conspiring with Russia, Cuba and Venezuela to give Senator McCain a campaign issue? That seems to be a thought well deserving of consideration; for the trash bin.
Facially, it all seems more like background noise. Russia has about as much strategic or even tactical need for a bomber base, a bomber refueling base or other military base in Cuba, or for that matter in Venezuela, as it has for a cavalry regiment mounted on cement bicycles. A nuclear attack by Russian bombers launched from Cuba could, most likely, be dealt with by the U.S. much more effectively than a missile attack launched from within Russian territory. At the first hint, via satellite photos or otherwise, of a Russian bomber presence in Cuba, the U.S. would almost certainly have a pretty good jet fighter force ready to shoot them down or turn them away should they invade U.S. air space. At least, I hope so. The Russian missiles based in Cuba in the early 1960's were seen pretty quickly during U-2 overflights, and one hopes that U.S. satellite technology is far better now. Even the free version of Google Earth provides some very clear close up, but dated, satellite photos of Cuba. A bomber attack launched from Venezuela would be even less likely to succeed. Either would almost certainly spark a war such as the world has never before seen. It does not seem likely that Russia would like that, or that it would initiate it; Iran, maybe, but Russia has too much to lose and so does the U.S. So, for that matter, do even Venezuela and Cuba.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Vovka
I believe that Russia should absolutely have a base in Cuba and Venezuela, and it probably will once the air carrier group is built (6-7 air carriers by 2012 ?). This will cool down some heads in the US and make them look into own backyard rather than seeking lunatic expeditions towards the Eastern Europe, Georgia, Ukraine etc. Once again, the balance of power will be restored. This time it's not an ideology but rather a reasonable system of checks and balances, where no power no matter how "good" (oh, please) is capable of imposing its will upon the others. Russia has too many economic interests to protect these days.
2 - Dave Nalle
Perhaps this is part of a plot to make Obama seem even MORE like Jack Kennedy.
And Vovka, you're completely insane. You don't make more peace through even more militaristic posturing.
Dave
3 - colleen
Russia will not station bombers in Cuba due to impracticality, although expect it to cooperate more with Cuba, and Latin America in general, socioeconomically
4 - Condor
This resounds like the sage advice to "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer."
Chavez is a clown, albeit a semi-dangerous one. Dan is correct in his statements regarding the economy of Chavezland. Once the good people under his regime have had enough, they will respond unkindly toward their fearless leader.
5 - Clavos
"Russia will not station bombers in Cuba due to impracticality, although expect it to cooperate more with Cuba..."
A few years ago, the Soviet Union was "cooperating more" with Cuba, subsidizing its nonexistent "economy" to the tune of over $2 billion a year. When the Union broke up, Russia dropped the subsidy.
A few years ago, Chavez of Venezuela picked it up, has sent Cuba more than $2 billion so far, and the Cuban economy is still moribund.
6 - Richard
Hugo chavez has no other aliances he can seek. So he leans towards Russia looking for support as a
natural ally against USA of times gone by. So,
instead of investing the oil windfall in technology and productive enterprizes, he spends it on creating acolytes for his same cause. (which is the poor of the world) Actually good cause, wrong approach. He has a following mainly because USA has turned against their own working class. They use to have an egalitarian bound society, first when they first instituted an egalitarian constitution and lived by it, lost 100 years later with the monopolistic robber barons, and then brought back with the egalitarian Rosevelt. Upto and including Einsenhour, Kennedy and Johson, it was thus. Starting from Nixon passing through Regan and the Bushes, it has become a class society where the upper class is created to be a permanent leisure class for generations to come, just like the monarchies of yesteryear of Europe which our revolution sought to eliminate. The modern day Republicans are the royalty of Europe's yesterday.
7 - Vovka
The question is not in Cuba or Venezuela. The problem is that the US "overstepped its national borders in any possible way" (V.V.Putin). The system of checks and balances is undermined because of that. And I hope Russia will step in.
8 - Dave Nalle
Richard, that illiterate class-warrior screed was really not worth posting three times.
Dave
9 - Dave Nalle
Vovka, are you familiar with Russia at all? Let me assure you as a former resident that having Russia 'step in' isn't good for anyone - ironically including Russia.
Dave
10 - Clavos
If Russia "steps in" anything, it'll probably smell bad.
11 - Vovka
Dave Nalle, I hope as a former resident (of what?) you understand that for every system having weights and counterweights, checks and balances is important for sanity. The US recently become insane, invading countless countries (destroying own economy along the way, but I guess that's not important in the Empire Of Good and Democracy). I'm not even talking about idiotic attempts by the US military to get into Ukraine and Georgia: as history teaches us, the US troops were kicked out of those places in 1918-1923 by the Red Army. But our American "partners" have short memories, perhaps.
12 - Dave Nalle
The US army was in Ukraine and Georgia in 1918? Really? Tell me where you got that information. Let me guess, the soviet school system?
And I'm a former resident of Moscow, which pretty much destroyed any confidence I have in the goodwill or competence of the Russian government.
As for the US turning into an evil empire, that attitude shows a profound lack of understanding of the US's motivations and actions in the world. I agree that it might be a symptom of insanity, but always with the best of intentions.
Dave
13 - Ruvy
Dave,
If I were you, I'd pay close attention to Vovka. You were in the USSR many years ago. It appears that Vovka lives in Russia or, or has knowledge of the country that is not so old and out-dated as yours.
More to the point, westerners make a huge mistake in ignoring the perspective of Russians and acting like they are so damned superior.
They are not.
Of course, if you want to act as if America is all-powerful and the Russians are just a bad dream that can be forgotten, you will give people like Putin their most powerful weapon - a stupid American who hasn't the brains to see the enemy sneak up on him, and who hasn't the sense to listen to another's perspective.
It was a painful lesson that I learned in moving here.
14 - Pablo
Davey re post 2:
"You don't make more peace through even more militaristic posturing."
Why dont you explain the to the guy your going to vote for, or even better to your bretheren in the GOP down in the good ole boy country bucko? Your hypocrisy knows NO bounds Davey. :)
15 - Flavius
After the fall of the Soviet Union, America tought that nobody can be a match for her.So America started the NEW WORLD ORDER.With this order they wanted to make with world what they want.They have promised RUssia that NATO would not expand to east.They have lied.Now,they will soon reach Russia's border,whit Ukraine and Georgia in NATO.And more,they want to put a missile shield in E Europe.What they want to do?Not to mention the Balkan war.I live in Romania in a city near Serbian border.I won't remember what i saw(so much suffering,so many tears,children crying on their parents dead body,peoples who lost everything).They helped the muslims in Kosovo,and they have weakend the Christinity.They have bombed civilian buildings,and a full train with refuges(womans and childrens).Not to mention the war in Iraq.And they still accuse Russia and tell the world that is evil.Now,Russia is reviewing it's military.Why? Because they are taking measures,they feel the threat.America is going mad,something must happend before they will start to conquer the world...
16 - Joaquin
Two key points: First, in both the case of Venezuela and Cuba, especially the latter, these prospects seem at best vague; indeed, as the article itself says, Cuba is not known to actually have made such an offer. In Venezuela's case. I really cannot blame Chavez if he indeed seriously or even half-seriously "made an offer" in this vein. Since 2000 the US though the USAID, the NED and myriad "civic" groups have been trying to ovrthrow Chavez Salvador Allende-style, and nearly succeeded in 2002 until the Venezuelans themselves "stepped in" to prevent it. If all this means anything, it's a propaganda and scare tactic gambit to scare us, the ever so gullible US public into a fear of Russian encirclement so as to pave the way for the putatively "more experienced" and certainly hrd-lined McCain's election. Second point addressed to Dave's July 27 23:53 posting: Yes, te US did insert US 12,000 troops into not just Ukraine and Georgia in 1918 but into northeastern and noerhwestern RUSSIA ITSELF in a 14-nation effort (unsuccessful)to assist the anti-Soviet White Guards - the Contras of the day - overthrow Russia's new and popularly supported Soviet Bolshevik government.
17 - Ruvy
I was waiting and hoping for people from Eastern Europe to comment. I'm glad to see that they have. It's about time that some of the Amero-centric shit at BC was countered with a bit of reality.
I was warned over two years ago by a young Russian lady who is very conversant in foreign affairs that the policy of the United States of setting up bases all around Russia would push Russia into the arms of China. In addition, I was warned that Putin was rebuilding the Russian Empire in response to American policy.
What Dan Miller failed to cover adequately in this article is the axis of Iran, Venezuela and Russia, with China backing up North Korea. This is the group of foreign powers who face America and who can threaten it in a new cold war.
Point. The North Koreans want food and money. If someone comes along with enough of both, they will be happy to set up nuclear facilities for the fellow with the goods.
Point. Conspiracy types in the States point (accurately) to the presence of European and Eastern European soldiers on American soil. But this presence comes at the cost of setting up bases with American troops in Central Asia which ony make a nuclear power, Russia, nervous.
Point. The Americans did attempt to overthrow the Soviet regime in the Russian Civil War. I have books from the era that document this attempted interference. This gives backing to the Soviet/Russian fear of American interference in its internal affairs, and provides the background behind Putin's charges of American interference.
Point. The Russian regime, in rebuilding the Russian Empire, is using, among other things, Russian emigrants to Israel to attempt to turn Israel in its entirety into a Russian base of some sort. Hamas and HizbAllah are propagandizing Russians here with Russian language propaganda, and many Russians here are biting the bait.
In addition, there has been a spate of Jew-hatred on the part of Russians who are not really Jews at all, dragged here by their parents, who were lured here by Israeli payments to immigrants.
Americans can ignore Russia if they want.
But they can no longer afford to at all. The country is not run by some stupid drunk anymore. It is run by a ruthless man capable both of killing and charming non-Russian leaders, and willing to do both.
18 - Empanada
1) Never trust anyone; particularly gov't, that includes the US, Russia, Venezuela or any other.
2) There is no solely "good" nor absolutely "bad" gov't/country. There are pro and con in every one; all is relative!
3) In worldwide history, USA has proven to behave again and again a teenager! Respect your elder, even when you think they are wrong. That includes Russia, Europe, China, Japan, and whole Middle East.
4) Being almighty powerful does NOT mean you are correct nor you own the right answer to all problems. Every country, every people deserve its right for self-determination, just as America enjoyed in their revolutionary years back in 1700 and 1800's. Back then, in British eyes, American were just a bunch of uncivilized, uneducated people, behaving pretty much as terrorist attacking British troops. Oops sorry, it was for a just cause, revolution and freedom. But that same standards do not apply today for other people, right?
5) Check and Balance, sounds good. Who sets the right check and balance? it is all subjective I guess. But yes, they are needed. Don't think so? Just open any history book, the older the better. Where are old the greatest civilizations? Why did they fall? Watch out America. Mankind is the only specie that made same mistake more than twice! And we call ourselves the intelligent ones?
6) Sorry to say, but current GWB admin has proven to be not more than just a teenager cowboy bullish prick, and, what foreign policy? Oh, there is NO foreign policy (Check Dictionary for definition of Policy)
7) Unfortunately, we are where we are today because of the "great" american foreign policy (aka "i only care for my economic interest")
8) We dont need more wars or military bases, what we need is more MUTUAL understanding, cooperation, and acceptance. We are different, stop trying to measure everyone by the same rule!
9) Watch out Venezuela and HugoChavez; his ambitions are large and more achievable than you think.
19 - Joaquin
... Oh yes, sily me. I inadvertently forgot to include our ever-so-accurate folks at the Central Intelligence(?)Agency (CIA) among the kitty of organizations who've been trying, and still continue trying to overthrow the twice-elected and "referendum" survivor popular President of the sovereign Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (Happy 54th Birthday, Pres. Chavez! And thanks for using your petrodollars the way they should be used, to fund very bady needed social programs and to generously - and understandibly shrewdly - sow goodwill beyond your borders, including in our own New Hampshire by providing subsidized low-cost badly-needed oil, which is something our own corporate bought-and-sold "leaders" and their corporate bedmasters never get around to doing. Instead, "our" own petrodollars are used by the foreign oil producers to buy US bonds which our own LAME duck then uses to fund his "Big Adventures" - Pee Wee Herman, where are you when we need you?). My apologies again Langley.
20 - bliffle
Daves hopes of US military competence are in vain as this administration has pursued a wide and deep policy of replacing competent people with those who are Politically Compliant and willingly subvert factual reports with boosterism.
"At the first hint, via satellite photos or otherwise, of a Russian bomber presence in Cuba, the U.S. would almost certainly have a pretty good jet fighter force ready to shoot them down or turn them away should they invade U.S. air space. At least, I hope so."
Hope all you wish, Dave, hope will not make it so.
21 - Deano
For the historically challenged, the US sent about 13,000 men to fight in the Russian Civil War. They went in two primary expeditions - in Vladivostok (about 8,000 men) and Arkhangelsk (5,000 men)in 1918. They lost about 400-odd men in total, some to combat but a significant number to the Spanish flu. They returned in 1919.
22 - Dave Nalle
Why dont you explain the to the guy your going to vote for
I think Bob Barr already understands this, Pablo.
Dave
23 - Dave Nalle
Since 2000 the US though the USAID, the NED and myriad "civic" groups have been trying to ovrthrow Chavez
USAID has been trying to overthrow Chavez? With what, food shipments?
Yes, te US did insert US 12,000 troops into not just Ukraine and Georgia in 1918 but into northeastern and noerhwestern RUSSIA ITSELF
So not in Ukraine or Georgia as claimed, and not in fact US troops, just supported by the US. As I recall those troops were primarily from other European nations.
Dave
24 - Deano
FYI...There were, in fact, US troops directly involved.
The American North Russia Expeditionary Force consisted of the 339th Infantry Regiment, 85th Division and the First Battalion of the 310th Engineers, 85th Division. They called themselves the "Polar Bears" due to the nature of the expeditionary force. They were involved in fighting around Arkhangelsk and the White Sea for approximately 9 months before being withdrawn in the wake of criticism and pressure for still being overseas after the Armistice in Nov 1918 that ended WWI. You can find their dead buried in Troy, Michigan. The last known survivor of the fighting died in 2003.
The American Expeditionary Force Siberia included the U.S. Army's 27th and 31st Infantry Regiments, volunteers from the 13th and 62nd Infantry Regiments primarily, as the name implies, based and operating in Siberia, along the railroad and the port of Vladivostok.
Both groups operated as a part of the Allied Expeditionary force (mainly British & French, although it included Canadians, Czecks, Poles, Greeks, Japanese etc.).
25 - Dan Miller
I have found the comments thus far very interesting, particularly those from abroad, and would like to share some of my perspectives gained as an old fart U.S. expat living in Panama for the past seven years.
I think President Castro is making a lot of sense; much more than his older brother ever did. Unrealistic expectations lead to disappointment and to encourage them is one of the cruelest and most counterproductive things one can do. Perhaps it might be useful were politicians in the U.S. to keep this in mind, instead of promising the moon when they can't even deliver a pound of green cheese.Panama, with a population of about 3.3 million, neither is nor has pretensions to become, a world power. That is, as far as I am concerned, a Good Thing. Living in a rural area up in the highlands, where our nearest neighbor is roughly a kilometer distant by road and there are few other Gringos, I have little foundation to speak about urban areas, such as Panama City and Colon which have their problems, or even the "51st State," Boquete, which has lots of gated communities, Gringos and its own albeit different problems, principally related to the influx of Gringos.
There seems to be a sense of self-sufficiency here, and little expectation that the Government will deal with local problems. Consequently, the local people do their best to deal with problems themselves; perhaps that is as it should be. When the roads really need work, local people with shovels do most of it. Sometimes, materials are provided by the local government, sometimes not. When the schools need work, local people volunteer labor and materials. From a U.S. perspective, there is quite a lot of poverty. However, there are few people who lack the basic necessities or, from my observation, who feel poor. Possibly, this is the case because (a) families help each other and (b) there are fewer affluent people of whom they can feel jealous. True, there are some rich Panamanians -- who tend to live far away (more than 400 kilometers) in Panama City -- and some rich Gringos closer by; however, they seem to be viewed as different and to be little more envied than a horse seems to envy a dog, or vice versa.
Few rural Panamanians have cars and, with gasoline at about $4.25 per gallon, just over half a day's wages, few could afford to drive them if they had them. They walk, ride their horses or take a bus. There seems to be little expectation that affluence is on the horizon.
I have not been to Cuba, but it was reported in one of the principal Panama City newspapers today that Raul Castro this past weekend offered rather a downbeat address, urging Cubans not to expect a whole lot of improvement in their lives anytime soon. According to an imperfect English translation, via Google,
Before coming to Panama, I spent a total of maybe a year, off and on, in Venezuela just as Chavez was coming to power; there seemed to be a lot of optimism, though not among the oligarchy or even the well-to-do. The rural areas were beautiful and bountiful. Food was plentiful, gasoline was very inexpensive (still is); people outside the urban slums seemed quite happy. My perception is that Chavez has impoverished his country and made life better for few other than his most enthusiastic supporters, while promising his diminishing numbers of poorer fans the moon. In recent years, Chavez has tried to establish himself as a world leader, for which he has few qualifications and for which Venezuela simply cannot provide the necessary resources except by diminishing the lives of her people. True, Venezuela has oil, very heavy crude with high sulphur content, for which the principal refineries are in the United States. She has little else to export. With Venezuelan crude at current prices, the lives of Venezuelans should be far better than they are. Although they have benefitted very little from the increases in oil prices, they are probably the ones most likely to suffer if and when oil prices drop, as has been happening recently.
I have no idea what Russia will do vis a vis Cuba and Venezuela, but suspect that she will do very little. Indeed, I don't think there is much she can do to assist Chavez, were that her wish, or even Cuba -- Russia was there for years, and did little to make the lives of Cubans better. She has more than enough on her own plate right now. Noise, maybe, but little more, as an inexpensive way to put the U.S. in her place, is all that I expect from her insofar as Venezuela and Cuba are concerned; she will probably be content to soak up Venezuelan oil money by selling armaments which Chavez claims Venezuela needs to protect her natural resources.
The speculation I offered in the article, that Cuba may be playing the U.S. off against her current benefactor, a moribund Chavez, gained in my opinion a modicum of support from Raul Castro's comments noted above. Although it would most likely make a bunch of Cuban expats living in Florida unhappy, it seems at least barely possible that President Castro is interested in receiving some benign help from the U.S. and that now may be the time for the U.S. to make some subtle moves in that direction.
Dan