The story of the first debate was that Mike Pence remained cool, calm, and on point—which is pretty easy to do, so long as you’re willing to throw the ticket under the bus and make up the points on the spot. Nowhere was this clearer than when Russia entered the debate.
Asked about the situation in Aleppo, Mike Pence began a tear-down of Vladimir Putin that would have done most any Republican proud … so long as that Republican wasn’t on a ticket with Donald Trump.
“And the small and bullying leader of Russia is now dictating terms to the United States to the point where all the United States of America -- the greatest nation on Earth -- just withdraws from talks about a cease-fire while Vladimir Putin puts a missile defense system in Syria while he marshals the forces and begins -- look, we have got to begin to lean into this with strong, broad-shouldered American leadership.”
The “small and bullying leader of Russia”? Let’s go to the Trump tape.
"Look at Putin—what he's doing with Russia—I mean, you know, what's going on over there. I mean this guy has done—whether you like him or don't like him—he's doing a great job in rebuilding the image of Russia and also rebuilding Russia period."
And of course ...
"I think it's inarguable that Vladimir Putin has been a stronger leader in his country than Barack Obama has been in this country.”
Oh, sorry. That last one wasn’t Donald Trump. It was Mike Pence. But not only was Pence’s position on Putin and Russia radically different during the debate, his statements on the topic were often simply lies.
Plus, there was just a slight World War III problem.
Beyond winning the White House, we must also elect more progressive Democrats in Congress. With the PCCC and Daily Kos, you can now make phone calls to voters in the key districts that will get us more and better Democrats. Click here to start.
It’s not just that Mike Pence disagrees with Donald Trump. Mike Pence’s position Tuesday night also disagrees with Mike Pence at any time prior to Tuesday night.
But Tuesday night Pence gives good Tough Military Position, one that probably sounded good to a lot of viewers.
“But about Aleppo and about Syria, I truly do believe that what America ought to do right now is immediately establish safe zones, so that families and vulnerable families with children can move out of those areas, work with our Arab partners, real time, right now, to make that happen.”
The problem with this? “Our Arab partners” when it comes to Aleppo are the rebel factions who are getting the hell bombed out of them by the Syrian government and the Russians. It’s not as if anyone else is anxious to step into the middle of this. The even bigger problem: if by “safe zones” Mike Pence means “no fly zones,” what does he propose to do when those no-fly zones are entered by Russian planes?
“And secondly, I just have to tell you that the provocations by Russia need to be met with American strength. And if Russia chooses to be involved and continue, I should say, to be involved in this barbaric attack on civilians in Aleppo, the United States of America should be prepared to use military force to strike military targets of the Assad regime to prevent them from this humanitarian crisis that is taking place in Aleppo.”
Pence is throwing around a lot of “strong, broad-shouldered American leadership” and “American strength” in these statements. What he means is bombs, missiles, and shooting at Russian assets.
Assad is Russia’s partner in the Middle East. Assad is Russia’s only partner in the Middle East. Russia regards Assad as one of their most important allies, and Syria as the most critical nation in the region.
Syria is Russia’s Israel.
From the moment that Russia entered into the conflict, their intent has not been to eliminate ISIS, or even to defeat the rebels, except to the extent that either of those actions shores up Assad. Because if Assad falls, it’s extremely likely that Russia will be all but shut out of the entire region. That’s not life or death—unless you’re an imperialist autocracy on the way to becoming a rogue state where leadership feels the Syrian connection is a vital part of the Big Picture. Like Russia.
Establishing a no-fly zone anywhere in Syria would be met with all the enthusiasm that America would feel if Russia declared suzerainty over the Upper Galilee. That’s not to say that there aren’t situations so desperate that it shouldn’t be considered. That’s not even to say that Aleppo doesn’t already represent such a situation. It’s just recognizing that Pence’s casual use of “safe zones” and “use military force to strike military targets of the Assad regime” is perilously close to declaring plain old all-out-war with Russia.
John Kerry has been pounding every brick in the Middle East, trying to find a way to stop Aleppo from stretching from bloodbath into mini-apocalypse. He hasn’t found it, because the Russians are absolutely, 1,000 percent dedicated to keeping Assad in power. At any cost. Any cost.
They do not care that their actions in Aleppo are earning the disgust of the world. They don’t care if half a million civilians die. It’s way down their priority list.
There are no “Arab partners” who are going to step into this—other than the ones already bleeding and dying on the ground. If we want to stop what’s happening in Aleppo, we have to be willing to risk the outcome of that choice.
And we may damn well do it.
President Obama has long refused to approve direct military intervention in Syria. And Mr. Putin may be assuming that Mr. Obama is unlikely to confront Russia in his final months and with an American election season in full swing. But with the rebel stronghold in Aleppo under threat of falling to the government, administration officials said that such a response is again under consideration.
But when Mike Pence says:
“We've just got to have American strength on the world stage. When Donald Trump becomes president of the United States, the Russians and other countries in the world will know they're dealing with a strong American president.”
There’s a lot more than posturing at stake. As Pence was prone to saying during the debate, Donald Trump is a businessman, not a politician. But this is one negotiation where it’s going to take more than bluster and a Chinese-made tie.
Trump’s position has been somewhat consistent—and consistently opposed to what Pence said. Yes, Trump wants to “bomb the hell” out of ISIS, or “bomb the shit” out of ISIS, presumably without regard to the fact that the vast majority of people in the remaining area controlled by ISIS want nothing to do with the so-called Islamic State. But Trump is also content to allow Assad to do as he pleases and leave Syria to the Russians—a view that terrifies our actual allies in the region.
Donald Trump may have a plan, however hazy, to take on ISIS. But it doesn't take into account the Syrian civilians living in opposition-held areas for whom being bombed and massacred is a fact of daily life. ...
"Are we better off with Assad?" Trump wondered aloud to CNN in September of last year. "We have no idea who these people [the rebels] are. We give them weapons, we give them ammunition, we give them everything. I mean, maybe it's worse than Assad. So what are we doing? Why are we involved?"
As with Ukraine, Trump’s position is basically Putin’s position. Pence’s position — at least on Tuesday night — is as much opposed to Trump as it is to Russia.
Aleppo is a horror. But is it a horror where the United States is willing to enter into what could be a bigger, and more demanding military conflict than anything we’ve seen in 60 years? Unfortunately, the moderator never asked that question. But we probably know what Pence would have said anyway. Something about “strength.”