"Asked about Ryabkov keeping the door open to basing troops and equipment in Latin America, Sullivan responded: “I’m not going to respond to bluster in the public commentary.”... “If Russia were to move in that direction, we would deal with it decisively.” apnews.com/article/europe…
So, he says he won't respond to bluster and then... does it anyway. This comment is of course all over the Russian media, presented for maximum effect as evidence of U.S. hypocrisy and so on and so forth.
By the way, in exploring the origins of the Cuban Missile Crisis, I came to the conclusion that Khrushchev's decision to deploy missiles in Cuba was mainly the result of his concern that Moscow was not allowed to do what the US allowed itself to do in Europe.
There was a sense of resentment of 'quod licet Iovi non licet bovi" - I'd say this is the key under-appreciated motive in Moscow's policy making then and now. Why? Because it goes to the heart of Russia's self-pitying discourse on humiliation and unfair treatment by the West.
My advice would be. "Deal with it decisively" if this is in your national interest but, really, "don't respond to bluster." What's the point? Only gives fodder to propagandists.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
