It was not the first terrorist attack, of course, nor is it
likely to be the last. ISIS takes credit. Media are voicing the obvious: Europe
is not able to defend itself. U.S .President Barack Obama, in Cuba that day,
expressed solidarity “with our friends and allies in Brussels.”
Media assessment of the tragedy pointedly took into account
that gathering intelligence information about ISIS secret plans and activity in
Brussels is extremely difficult, as 26 percent of the city’s population are
Muslims, and some enclaves are entirely Muslim. Apparently saying this is no
longer politically incorrect.
But there is a much larger politically uncomfortable truth:
Europe cannot defend itself against any deathly enemy, not just ISIS. The
European Union is a military power vacuum. It is watching helplessly as Russia
is playing out its agenda in Syria, killing by air bombing hundreds of civilians in towns held by pro-Western
opposition groups, and arranging a cease-fire to its liking with protection for
Syria’s dictator Assad and no noticeable slowdown in migration exodus into Turkey
and Europe, which is tearing the EU apart. Apparently, Britain’s exit from the
European Union is becoming “ever more likely” (Gideon Rachman in Financial
Times, March 22).
But even if the European Union had the military punch to
cripple ISIS in Syria, the Russia-Assad presence would make such a move unlikely.
Forget NATO, which is as active as Obama when it comes to face
Russia. Thus Chancellor Merkel made an expedient deal with Turkey, trying to
stem refugee flow.
Still, no one among the powers that be is willing to admit
that Russia binds the hands of the West in Syria and complicates the options
possible against ISIS. But Moscow carries it farther: “There is no doubt Moscow is taken more
seriously (in the West) than six months ago, and this will have an impact on
the Ukrainian talks”, according to Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of ‘Russia in Global
Affairs’ in Moscow: “Russia is following a clear strategy in Syria” (Financial
Times, March 21).
Actually, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian
counterpart Sergey Lavrov were talking in Moscow just after ISIS had struck in
Brussels. John Kerry has been having rough time. He represents the country and
its leader President Obama whose political party, the Democrats after the Cold
War, have pursued shaky policies in their domestic and international agendas. They
have not paid the price until Vlad Putin struck in Ukraine. He did not do it
sooner mainly because Russia’s military power had been in a doghouse for two
decades. Even today some optimists in the West discount Russia as a mere “gas
station”.
At the same time, the opposition Republican Party’s business
elite has been on a feeding binge, leaving in the dust their middle-class and
Southern white constituency. Globalization and immigration issues are the two
wedges that fired up the campaign of Donald Trump for presidency, attracted a mostly
white working class following, and showed that demagoguery can be a powerful
tool in the hands of a crowd-pleasing wheeler-dealer who is also a historical
ignoramus.
Resurgence of American power and leadership cannot come from
a Republican Party in its present shape. That party is now in shatters —
mainly because its archaic socio-economic agenda was and is no match for
Mr. Trump’s bulldozer.
As for the European Union, its socioeconomic and political
foundation could hold without a realistic military capability only on the
assumption that the end of history has indeed arrived with the end of the Cold
War. The structure is shaking as Vladimir Putin is standing at the gate and ponders
the next move. Europe’s politicians are following Obama’s lead by promising to
“degrade” ISIS capability, and deflecting the attention from the fundamentals
of how to deter the Russian power surge.
Notice that the entire Western chorus commiserates the
victims of ISIS terrorism, while having no similar sentiment for thousands of
victims of Russian aggression in Ukraine.
