On Tuesday, Dutch investigators released a long-awaited report on Malaysia Flight MH17, the passenger airline shot down on July 17, 2014 over Ukrainian airspace. The Dutch Safety Board (DSB) spent months analyzing debris and wreckage strewn all over eastern Ukraine, territory held by pro-Russian rebels. The safety board ultimately concluded that the civilian flight was shot down by a Russian-made Buk missile.
“Flight MH17 crashed as a result of the detonation of a warhead outside the airplane,” explained DSB Chairman Tjibbe Joustra, “This warhead fits the kind of missile that is installed in the BUK surface-to-air missile system.” There were 298 people on board flight MH17. All the passengers died, including 88 children. The circumstantial (and palpably physical evidence) is indisputable. The Russians are responsible for the downing of MH17. The Kremlin either ordered the strike directly or condoned the assault launched by occupying pro-Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine, armed and equipped by the Russian military.
And yet, the DSB was cautious about directly invoking the Russians. Understandably, the DSB does not have the geopolitical leverage or gravitas to hold the Russians culpable. Vladimir Putin and his oligarchs would read explicit language of Russian aggression as a provocation, perhaps even worse. As a result, the DSB treaded softly. “Even though the Dutch-led inquiry did not say who pulled the trigger, Russian officials were already disputing the findings set to further degrade strained ties between Moscow and the West,” reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).
“My heart goes out to the victims of MH17. Too much energy spent trying to cast blame.”
U.S. Embassy in Russia Spokesman Will Stevens
The United States is the only entity strong enough to challenge Putin. Unfortunately. President Obama’s policy of “strategic patience,” does not allow room for holding post-Soviet criminal enterprises responsible, even if it means letting Putin get away with the murder of nearly 300 innocents, including Americans. The president scapegoats “colonialism” for the shifting tectonic plates of power politics.
In a now-deleted tweet, an Obama official dismissed the report as irrelevant. According to The Free Beacon, “A spokesman for the U.S. embassy in Russia said on Tuesday that ‘too much energy’ has been spent trying to discover who is responsible for the terrorist attack on a Malaysian airlines flight last year that killed nearly 300 people.” Cowards litter the lawns of the White House. In an insult to the victims and their families, embassy spokesman Will Stevens screeched:
My heart goes out to the victims of MH17. Too much energy spent trying to cast blame.
When 2012 Republican candidate Mitt Romney cited Russia as one of the biggest threats facing U.S. interests, President Obama scoffed at the idea, mocking the GOP contender for living in the past and digging up the Cold-War.
Romney was correct. In fact, he perfectly predicted the course of foreign policy developments during Obama’s second-term. Instead of heeding the call of prudence, Obama did what he does best: making straw-man arguments and dismissing geopolitical realities in favor of ideological rigidity. Like a school-yard bully unable to engage in reasoned debate, Obama impulsively taunted Romney, saying:
Governor Romney, I’m glad that you recognize that Al Qaida is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what’s the biggest geopolitical threat facing America, you said Russia, not Al Qaida; you said Russia, in the 1980s, they’re now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because, you know, the Cold War’s been over for 20 years. But Governor, when it comes to our foreign policy, you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s…
Cool and measured, Romney’s prescient response now haunts the Obama administration, underlining the dramatic failure of foreign policy:
Russia I indicated is a geopolitical foe… and I said in the same — in the same paragraph I said, and Iran is the greatest national security threat we face. Russia does continue to battle us in the U.N. time and time again. I have clear eyes on this. I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia, or Mr. Putin. And I’m certainly not going to say to him, I’ll give you more flexibility after the election. After the election, he’ll get more backbone.
Obama’s hallmark arrogance was on full-display that evening. Rather than focusing on geopolitical contingencies and foreign policy decisions, the president and his cohort of single-minded social issue peddlers ran with Romney’s “binders full of women” comment. Historians will look back at that moment and cringe at just how much this president harnessed red-herrings, witticisms, and snide remarks to avoid strategic deliberation.