As we approach on Christmas day, the fifteenth anniversary of the end of the Soviet Union, we can catch the anniversary panel discussions on C-span. What is fascinating is that quite often these panels feature several old men from both sides who were “players”, and provide for us today, a unique window for those who study crises situations to learn the give and take of internal dynamics that take place on both sides.

The lessons that can be learned are insightful. Instead of the solid antigonism we were told brought down the Soviet Union, we find that the United States often passed on opportunities when it could have hastened the collapse and often inexplicapbly sat by and did nothing.

For example, had the US and the G7 countries offered hard currency in a Marshal Plan to Gorbachev which he begged for in the 1991 meeting in London, the cabal that led the coup, never would have acted. Some think that a kinder, gentlier, Soviet Union aka modern China, would have been a better option for us to face, than the poverty and collapse of not only the governmental, but the economic functions as well.

Brent Scowcraft brought up an interesting point. As these event unfolded in Europe 15 years ago, there were those emphatically arguing that this was the time to release the tanks, charge into the Soviet Union through East Germany and Poland. “Get them when they are down.” With hindsight we see this as a stupid action. However the core of that group, is now embedded in our current White House administration and for this reason, lessons learned from studying an event 15 year ago, could fortell today’s events.

As events unfolded during the (2nd) Russian Revolution, it is clear that great statemanship from the first Bush administration and the decision keep the leash tight on the military, are the principal reasons events flowed smoothly with no loss of life. As glimpsed in these panal discussions, James Baker’s voice led the way to peace and prosperity. Cheney and Rumsfield’s direction could have led to disasters of immense proportions.

Today, we gain insight into the internal discussions of today’s Administration, before we went to war. Colin Powel stands out as the voice of reason against the cacaphony of the “lockstep” boys. We see that today’s polorization of advisors solidly along one conservative philosophy of action, is the principal factor of why we decided to engaged in what now is being called the Trillion $ War.

As Americans, we need to use these examples to understand for ourselves, that discussions that put all facts on the table, are our greatest source of strength. Anytime one group dominates the arguments of action without debate, we must realise that although we can win some battles, due to the fraility of human nature, we are doomed to lose some battles as well.

Loyality is overated. Ideas that can pop back up when they get knocked down,…………………..are the ideas probably worth pursuing.