Global News : Passport : Ricks : Drezner : Walt : Rothkopf : Lynch
The Cable : The AfPak Blog : Net Effect : Shadow Govt. : Madam Secretary : The Call
Pyrrhic "victory"
Kyrgyzstan has reversed an earlier decision to end U.S. access to Manas air base, a valuable hub supplying U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Both Reuters and the New York Times describe this step as a "victory" for the United States and for the Obama administration.
In fact, it's a victory for the government of Kyrgryzstan, which had threatened to close the base earlier this year, shortly after Russia had offered them a $2 billion loan. Like a smart landlord in the midst of a housing shortage, Krygyzstan threatened to evict us if we didn't pay more rent. So the annual charge for using the base will rise from about $17 million to $60 million, and the United States also agreed to spend $36 million to expand the airport and additional millions on economic development and drug eradication programs.
When Washington cares more about Central Asian security than Central Asian governments do, it will be child's play for them to charge us whatever they think the market will bear. Admittedly, it's small change when you consider the overall cost of the Afghan operation (over $200 billion in defense costs since 9/11 and currently running $2-3 billion per month, according to the Congressional Research Service). But when the federal budget is hemorrhaging red ink and state and local governments are slashing budgets and programs right and left, I don't see why succumbing to this sort of blackmail is a "victory" for us. Krygryzstan gets a bigger air base, and we get a less well-educated and less healthier population here, not to mention crummier public infrastructure. Maybe it's the best of several bad alternatives, but let's hold the high-fives.
VYACHESLAV OSELEDKO/AFP/Getty Images
Advertisement
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the Slate Group,
a division of Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC.
All contents ©2009 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC. All rights reserved.
“The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.”
Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Relations at Harvard University.
Daily Reads
Affiliations
Recent Writings
At least Kyrgryzstan provides SOME service
How about the ~$ 5,000,000,000.00 or so that are taken from my taxes (and yours) and sent to the fanatical racist de facto apartheid Israeli regime every single year? ($3b for military aid alone, to bomb civilians, against US laws).
What do we get from Israel for this HUGE sum, EVERY year?
At least Kyrgryzstan provides SOME service to us.
Probably they managed the increase in rent without having any strong lobby as the case for paying them is actually rational.
What do we get from Israel for this HUGE sum, EVERY year?
Let me answer my own question: because we support that racist regime we become the targets of terrorism.
That is what we buy with our dollars, from Israel. A big bulls-eye painted on anyone with a US passport.
Go AIPAC!
Do the Russians Pay?
Nice way to frame the issue. What does this mean for the Russia loan?
Quantum dollars
Russia paid a trifling $2 billion to Kyrgyzstan just to see it bilk Washington. The cash reported to have been exacted from Uncle Sam is just the above-the-table amount. Probably double that has changed hands under the table.
It's, what -- 2% of the
It's, what -- 2% of the russian loan? It amounts to a fraction of the interest payments.
The obvious approach is that they will hold us up for more money until we're paying the entire interest on the russian loan.
That way they don't default until after we pull out.
Russia pays them, we pay russia.
When Washington cares more
When Washington cares more about Central Asian security than Central Asian governments do, it will be child's play for them to charge us whatever they think the market will bear.
Not to be too subtle, but for a central asian ruler there's a big difference between "cares about central asian security" and "invites a foreign power from another continent to station military forces inside your nation to attack your neighbors".
It takes a peculiar mind to connect those two concepts.
What has Israel (or Egypt) done for me lately?
Prof.,
how about a similar blog column asking the simple question of what we get for our >$8b to apartheid Israel and repressive Egypt (per year)?
(I mean besides making me a terrorist target -- i.e. what positive effect does it have?)
What has Israel (or Egypt) done for me lately?
I want my tax $ back!
It sounds like Walt is
It sounds like Walt is perturbed that we got jacked, but what does that have to do with Realism or foreign policy. Realism is accepting that we have to pay market price.
The real question is whether we need to be there at all, which would be a serious analysis. If so, it sounds relatively cheap. And in my opinion, if we can achieve foreign policy aims for a mere tens of millions of dollars then it is money well spent.
Last I checked in here, Walt was playing the optimist, advocating the "strengthening the Palestinian moderates" game despite it having failed repeatedly in the past. Now he's the pessimist, complaining about the wind.
When do we get to the Realism?
It sounds like Walt is
It sounds like Walt is perturbed that we got jacked, but what does that have to do with Realism or foreign policy. Realism is accepting that we have to pay market price.
The real question is whether we need to be there at all, which would be a serious analysis. If so, it sounds relatively cheap. And in my opinion, if we can achieve foreign policy aims for a mere tens of millions of dollars then it is money well spent.
Last I checked in here, Walt was playing the optimist, advocating the "strengthening the Palestinian moderates" game despite it having failed repeatedly in the past. Now he's the pessimist, complaining about the wind.
When do we get to the Realism?
"strengthening the Palestinian moderates" game
' "strengthening the Palestinian moderates" game despite it having failed repeatedly in the past.'
hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.............
you mean like when Palestinians were allowed to vote and they voted in Hamas -- and then the US/Israel forcibly overturned democracy since it did not produce the desired result? Yeah, that is really "strengthening the Palestinian moderates".
Whatever.
Want to strengthen the Palestinians? Give them $3billion in bombs and jets per year like we do the apartheid Israeli regime.
"strengthening the Palestinian moderates" game
' "strengthening the Palestinian moderates" game despite it having failed repeatedly in the past.'
hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.............
you mean like when Palestinians were allowed to vote and they voted in Hamas -- and then the US/Israel forcibly overturned democracy since it did not produce the desired result? Yeah, that is really "strengthening the Palestinian moderates".
Whatever.
Want to strengthen the Palestinians? Give them $3billion in bombs and jets per year like we do the apartheid Israeli regime.
I frankly don't see what
I frankly don't see what Walt's problem is. Bribery is an established part of foreign policy - would he rather that the US scrounge around for another route to bring troops into Afghanistan, or try to rely even more upon the dangerous Khyber Pass route?
In any case, we can't ship "lethal supplies" through it anymore. Not that it matters, because the airbase largely shipped new soldiers and fuel to Afghanistan.
Bilking in Asia
BTW, it has come out in France that shadowy forces within the Pakistani government blew up a bus full of French naval engineers on May 8, 2002 in Karachi because France had stopped paying "gifts and commissions" to corrupt Pakistani naval officers while supplying and fitting out the Pakistani submarine fleet (Agosta 90B conventional subs).
It appears that Bishkek never
It appears that Bishkek never intended to close the base anyway. It was about getting more money, and the Russians using the base as leverage over Obama.
In this sense, they won. It's like Cuba. The Soviets may not have placed their missiles, but they got us to remove theirs from Turkey. You can spin it as a victory, but its less than Pyrrhic. It's more like getting the mafia to give you a discount on your monthly protection fees.
The signal from Kirghistan was clear - we can do what we want, and when we want, and you better act that way.