Responding to ISIS and the Syrian Refugee Crisis Is Dividing Policymakers Both in Washington and Moscow

Responding to ISIS and the Syrian Refugee Crisis Is Dividing Policymakers Both in Washington and Moscow

Responding to ISIS and the Syrian Refugee Crisis Is Dividing Policymakers Both in Washington and Moscow

Will the result be a spreading or curtailing of the new US-Russian Cold War?

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Nation contributing editor Stephen F. Cohen and John Batchelor continue their weekly discussion of the new Cold War. Pointing out that Senator Marco Rubio’s recent statement, “We do not welcome Russia’s assistance against ISIS,” has long reflected bipartisan opinion in Washington, Cohen emphasizes that leading representatives of the Obama Administration have changed their minds and are now exploring President Vladimir Putin’s proposal for Russia to join the military struggle against the Islamic State in Syria. If such a coalition develops, it could ease the US-Russian confrontation over another civil war, the one in Ukraine.

In Moscow, however, Putin’s overture to Washington is not going unchallenged. Some of his own advisers, recalling the Soviet experience in Afghanistan, are warning against any substantial Russian military involvement in Syria, while Putin’s ultra-nationalist opposition is asserting that he will use cooperation with Washington in Syria to “sell out” Russian-backed rebels in Eastern Ukraine.

In addition, high-level officials in Moscow are openly debating whether or not Russia should open its borders to refugees fleeing the fighting in the Middle East. Meanwhile, the US-backed government in Kiev, seizing upon the visit of a NATO delegation, escalated the rhetoric of the Cold War by calling for full NATO membership for Ukraine. As Cohen argued months ago, the new Cold War cannot be confined to Ukraine. As happened during the preceding Cold War, “linkages” are rapidly spreading from Europe to the Middle East.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x