As the ideological wrapping comes off Russia's actions, they are revealed as
those of just another imperial power seeking to assert itself. Now free of
the Marxist dogma and the impulsive decisions it inspired - like deploying
nuclear missiles in Fidel Castro's Cuba - Russia's actions become less
dangerous, more predictable.
This not-so-new Russia is basically asking only for what the old, czarist
one sought: power, respect, fear. Not worldwide revolution. That's a
definite improvement.
If any country now represents a revolutionary idea in the world, it is this
one, just as it has done since 1776. The theory that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
rights, and that among those are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That notion will always be revolutionary.
What has changed is that ideas like democracy and human rights no longer
have a powerful competitor in Marxism-Leninism. Not in Russia, which has
returned to its autocratic ways, and not even on the Chinese mainland, which
looks more and more like a capitalist dictatorship every day - although the
preferred phrase in Beijing is "socialism with Chinese characteristics."
Only on American college campuses does Marxism retain much attraction, and
even there it must put down periodic revolts by more independent thinkers.
Something else has changed since the old days. When a Nikita Khrushchev
would bang his shoe on the table and warn that he and his sort would bury
us, the immediate, natural impulse was to respond in kind. That impulse may
still be there, but these days it's controlled. The usual pundits may not
have noticed, but this administration has changed, too. Fighting a difficult
war will teach leaders a certain humility.
In response to Comrade Putin's tirade - excuse me, Mr. Putin's pointed
criticisms - the new American secretary of defense, Robert Gates, responded
with Š a soft word. The kind that turneth away wrath. He refused to be
provoked. He summed up the essence of his remarks in a single sentence: "One
cold war was quite enough."
Secretary Gates' gentle touch provided yet another reminder that one need
not shout to be heard. He was particularly impressive when he responded to
Tsar Vladimir's angry speech the day before with a touch of humor: "As an
old cold warrior, one of yesterday's speeches almost filled me with
nostalgia for a less complex time. Almost."
Noting that both he and former KGB agent Putin had served in their
countries' intelligence agencies, Mr. Gates remarked that "old spies have a
habit of blunt speaking. However, I have been to re-education camp, spending
four a half years as a university president and dealing with faculty."
That observation drew laughter and applause. His audience of diplomats
understood, like Woodrow Wilson, why faculty fights are so vicious. (The
stakes are so small.)
In case you haven't noticed, Donald H. Rumsfeld isn't U.S. secretary of
defense any more. And this one is a decided improvement.
Meanwhile, the president's national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, has
journeyed to Moscow to assure the Russians that those new anti-missile
defenses in Europe present no threat to their country; he pointed out that
they're designed to deter others farther East from acting on any wild ideas
about unleashing a nuclear holocaust. No need to mention any specific
countries or personalities. For example, Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Over at the State Department, Condi Rice's latest, wary deal with North
Korea makes it clear that John Bolton doesn't work there any more. However
grateful all of us can be for his valiant and even effective attempts to
clean up the United Nations, it was time for a new tack. This one was taken
together with Russia, China, Japan and South Korea, not unilaterally.
The idea that conservative rhetoric should show a decent restrain is being
revived. The Ann Coulters are still valued, but only for their entertainment
value. The old conservatism of quiet good sense, even good humor, is making
a comeback, the neo brand is being phased out.
The realization dawns that there's no need to respond in opposite but
equally strident tones to every vitriolic attack on American policy from a
Putin or Chavez or Ahmedinejad. That, too, is a decided improvement. This
republic, unlike Russia's resurgent autocracy, is too powerful to have to
emphasize its power.
One keeps hearing demands from this president's critics that he change his
ways, adopt a more multilateral approach, and generally moderate his foreign
policy. Let's not spoil their fun by pointing out that he has already done
so.