West should set its own red lines, not just accept Putin’s, argues veteran diplomat
Former German diplomat Wolfgang Ischinger says Western leaders should be making more threats and be willing to follow them through.
The West should spend less time fretting about Russian President Vladimir Putin's red lines and set its own, says veteran German diplomat Wolfgang Ischinger.
“Russia keeps saying, if you do this, if you cross this or that red line, we might escalate,” said the 78-year-old onetime chairman of the Munich Security Conference. “Why don't we turn this thing around and say to them: ‘We have lines and if you bomb one more civilian building, then you shouldn't be surprised if, say, we deliver Taurus cruise missiles or America allows Ukraine to strike military targets inside Russia’?”
That way the onus will be on Moscow to decide whether to cross the red lines — or face the consequences.
I'm no "veteran diplomat" but in my experience it is only the people without real power who make threats. When you have power, you don't need to make threats. You just respond to events with whatever proportionate response is necessary and within your capability. You don't need to provide a preview of what those responses will be.
Setting "red lines" looks to me like weakness because it is essentially a plea to the other side not to do those things that you don't want them to do, and it invites them to push up to those red lines, do anything but, and test their boundaries to test your commitment to them.
Additionally, even if it didn't look weak, setting an established red line means Russia can snuggle right up to the line.
The us, and perhaps the west in general, hasn't really used red lines since Obama threatened Syria if they used chemical weapons and then didn't follow through.
I disagree. Scaled down to small and harmless it's like handling kids. You explain what you don't want them to do and what happens/you're going to do if they continue. Now it's crucial you go through with what you threatened them with.
If you either don't deliver on the "threat" or don't act as you said you would, guess what happens? They just continue or it even gets worse.
Of course it's more delicate/difficult when handling with powerful and intelligent adults but it's at least similar. Not issuing threats is just not communicating. If you then just act (violently), things are more likely to escalate.
Edit: or back to the kids analogy: don't tell them anything but smack them once they went too far: may help in that instance but they'll just learn to better avoid you and do shit behind your back.
If you think that international diplomacy between nation states is like handling kids then you're not a veteran diplomat either.
Red line: invasion of Ukraine
Response: F-22s over Ukrainian skies
Meanwhile Israel
Red line: no red lines
Response: they have right to defend themself
There is a red line. The west keeps saying over and over again that they must defend themselves within international law.
The problem is that they either ignore the red line or deny that it was ever crossed.
They'll dead ass look you in the eye and tell you that the colour red doesn't exist, without a single fuck given.
It's insane. Shows how much of international politics isn't "Which country benefits from what", but "What levers of decisionmaking are manipulated by whom". A little lobbying and foreign PR goes a long way.
There have been some responses: https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/08/1153656 https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/07/experts-hail-icj-declaration-illegality-israels-presence-occupied
Laws are meaningless if criminals are not held accountable. It doesn't matter that anyone who supports Israel supports fascism — 30% of US voters support fascism. The fact is that as long as the US (and 5 eyes) supports and arms Netanyahu, the genocide will continue; everything they declare to the contrary is nothing more than a virtue signal.
The ICJ and all opposition is meaningless unless they are willing to take collective economic and military action again Israel and its supporters. They will not.
I hope you aren't saying what I think you're saying here.
In any case, the main reason for western support of Israel is the same as the reason for western support of Turkey. Both have obnoxious leadership but both are in key geographic locations, and the value of having them on-side against their neighbours is greater than the value in cutting them loose.
That Israel has established a death grip on American politics since the 1980s?
Gonna press X to doubt. Turkiye controls one of the most vital straits in the world. Israel primarily specializes in antagonizing its neighbors, many of whom are also our close allies, damaging our international reputation, pouring money in to corrupt our domestic political processes (not that we really need help with that, but the corruption becomes more pro-Israel), while murdering American citizens and selling American secrets to our enemies.
And millions in AIPAC money. The Jews control the world conspiracy theory is of course false, but you'd be extremely naive if you think the decades and dollars Usrael spent creating a government and public that's friendly to its interests isn't a big part of the US government's current attitude.
Americans stop making everything about the US challenge (impossible)
You know most other western countries support Israel too, right?
There's Western support and there's what the US does for Israel. No other state gets away with regularly killing US citizens the way Israel does.
They have that right tough. It's just what we are all witnessing goes "a little" further than that.
hard disagree. Maybe if a foreign country wanted to create a Jewish ethnostate it should have set the borders inside its own sovereign lands instead of displacing 300k people it didn't give a shit about and causing an immediate regional war and decades of ongoing conflict?
Maybe then we could consider Israel a real country. Seeing how it didn't go that way? What israel deserves is to dissolve
And in your suggested dissolution of the state of Israel, what happens then? And what happens to the Jews that now live there?
I think if we're following history and making a point we should put new israel on top of your home. No problem right?
That's not an answer to the question though, you are advocating for the dissolution, so let's put it on the table...
If your question wasn't a flippant and dismissive response to my position, then neither was my answer.
No, you made a statement that required a follow up question.. requiring you to elaborate. But I have the feeling that you are answering like this cause you simply refuse to say the quiet part out loud, or are to cowardly to come out and say it. But that's OK. I think most people reading your response get what you mean.
Every accusation is a confession
Sure.. you still are dancing around specifying what your dissolution of the state of Israel would look like.
I'd personally like to see Netanyahu in a small concrete cell in Scheveningen.. just so we're clear.
Im dancing around what i hoped youd eventually figure out: to be clear, i really don't respect your ridiculous red herring)
Go look up red herring, realize how silly you just looked and improve your debate skills.
Elsewhere.
The same thing that happened to the Jews that lived there for millenia before Israel was created, the become normal citizens with no special rights or mandates, and are actually subject to laws intended on keeping all people safe, not just Jews. It worked continuously for millenia through dozens of different ruling states with a half dozen ruling religions, the state of Israel and it's fascism utilizing ng Jewish supremacy as a base ideology fucked that up.
Well, that looks like it ignores reality a bit. That the current state of Israel is doing fucked up stuff atm gets no arguement from me, but it did not happen in a vacuum.
Spouting revisionist nonsense about how equal the Jews where treated all over the world also does not help the situation either. Nor does ignoring the current situation and how if the state where to be dissolved and a new state created in its place that would give all people of the region equal rights and protections.. they would magically all get along.
So again.. what then? What would you suggest?
I mean in many places they were. Raging antisemitism was mostly a European problem. That's why they kept fleeing to Muslim lands.
Uhm.. what? Kept fleeing to Muslim lands? Antisemitism a European thing.. wow.. someone did a number on you man.. I'd suggest you ask for a refund from school.
Uh... What? Yes they kept fleeing to Muslim lands at least learn the history of the people whose Apartheid you're rooting for (not that Israel represents Jews as a whole I know that's not the case). A large fraction of Egyptian Jews, for example, were originally from Spain and were expelled due to the Reconquista, and the first two Aliyahs were European Jews escaping from pogroms to the more tolerant Ottoman empire. Also modern Muslim anti-semitism was, in fact, imported from Europe in the 19th century and strongly intensified due to the conflict with Zionists. Again, learn the history of the people whose Apartheid you're rooting for and the people whose oppression you're rooting for before you make ignorant statements again.
Nothing??? Just put them and Palestinians in the same place and make them create the equal multiethnic democracy Israel said it would but didn't become.
Yeah, we tried that. With the neighboring countries intervening and waging war, and the following wars we ended up here. But this time it will be different.
Uh... What? Israel is, and has always been from the planning phase, a Jewish-dominated settler colony. This is literally why they caused the Nakba. How does that sound like a multiethnic democracy?
The original plans where also a lot smaller and entitled Palestinians to a lot of land and their own state. Neighboring countries and Palestinians would not have it. The region was english ruled because the ottomans sided with Germany in ww1.. they where by definition the baddies. Then WW2 happened. You seem to be cherry picking a lot of stuff that happened over the course of the last 120 years or so for that area.
A lot smaller, but with a lot of the better land and half the Palestinian population. Would you agree to half the people of your country being ruled by an explicitly hostile, foreign people?
Way to move the goalposts... It's a series of own goals compounded by "help" from their friends that landed the Palestinians in this horror. In Turn the current horror now has 3 revisionist antisemites in a trenchcoat using the poor Palestinians as a beard to practice their antisemitism out in the open.
I'm not sure that is as useful as it sounds. Yes you are trying to establish some pressure but then you might get lost on technicalities of their actions instead of focusing on the bigger picture.
There's no "might". The US set a red line of an invasion in Rafah. Israel rolled right over that line with tanks and airstrikes. Nothing happened.
Something did happen though, the US gave even more aid and support to Israel.
Yes, but Russia doesn't have nuclear weap... I mean, Russia doesn't control Congr... Totally different situation ok!
putins are fictional and nothing happens. If we do do one it will happen and right now they don't want to get that involved.
Make sure to listen very well to what former germans veteran diplomats have to say and go back to work
Who accepts them tho?
Republicans.
Ehhhhh, maybe, maybe not. Given the fact that all interested parties are nuclear powers, pushing a psychopath to the point where they feel cornered might not have the effect this 78 year old thinks it might. Under what circumstances does bombing Moscow with Taurus missiles improve Ukraine's situation? The only strategy is attrition. The allies have more resources than Russia does, so continue sanctions, and increase sanctions to other countries if they do business with Russia. Cut off the money and watch Russia fumble. Keep offering them off-ramps. Every single "red line" Putin has mentioned has been a nothingburger. If this statement was made in earnest, it's a bad strategy. De-escalation through escalation isn't working for Putin, and I doubt it would work for us.
Yeah let's not do that. Only in fun stupid comments.
Instead we should continue this whatever it is. Give Ukraine ammo, let them use it up. Give them so more.
We've seen what happens when the US goes to war to defend others. We've seen what happens when the US replaces leaders. Etc, many scenarios have been played already. We should just let ruzzia use up all it's might so it can become a more equal fight.
The Ukrainians would be very proud when they finally get to live in a free country that fought against invasion and won. The ruzzians would never attack again and hopefully become productive and against war like Japan or Germany.
::: spoiler Politico Europe - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report) Information for Politico Europe:
::: spoiler Search topics on Ground.News https://www.politico.eu/article/west-should-set-its-own-red-lines-not-just-accept-putin-wolfgang-ischinger-veteran-diplomat-munich-security-conference/
https://www.politico.eu/article/diplomacy-wolfgang-ischinger-munich-security-conference/ ::: Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
Yeah sure, let's all play "poke the madman"! THAT can't POSSIBLY result in the outbreak of WW3 as Cold War+ becomes total war!
Great fucking idea, WOLFGANG! 🤦
Who cares, stupid european peasants are going to fight wwiii for us