Coincidentally, these days high-level evaluative judgments were made about the main content of the modern foreign policy of the two leading military-political powers of the world - Russia and the United States. Russian policy was described by General Robert Ashley, head of the intelligence department of the US Department of Defense, in the format of a document presented during hearings in the Senate Armed Services Committee. And, accordingly, the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation Nikolai Patrushev assessed American policy. These statements are noteworthy, first of all, for their approximate status equivalence, which gives us reason to consider them, approximately to the same extent, on the one hand, expert, and on the other, propaganda artifacts. The last component is always present by default in any official opinion that involves public announcement.
But, since in this case the general formats of these assessments are about the same and there is undoubtedly an objective expert beginning, it is all the more interesting to compare their content. And to see - the policy of which of the two countries is perceived more negatively in the other and, accordingly, from the point of view of vis-a-vis, is more unacceptable and contrary to the generally accepted regulatory framework of international relations.
Let's start with the American general. I want to immediately emphasize. What he recorded in his report, in part of the assessment of Russian foreign policy, practically does not go beyond the framework of these generally binding norms. And it actually looks like expert recognition of the fact that the modern Russian Federation is a completely normal country with completely ordinary, natural geopolitical interests.
Judge for yourself - by quotes from this document RUMO USA:
"Moscow’s strategy is to force the United States and its allies to recognize Russia's security interests, and also recognize its importance as a global player whose interests cannot be ignored without consequences ... Although Russia has repeatedly stressed that it is not interested in the new cold war with the USA, she also made it clear that she would no longer go to reconciliation with the West, making concessions ". https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Ashley_03-06-18.pdf
Already on the basis of this quotation alone, it is possible to make a completely unambiguous conclusion that Russia is seeking absolutely basic things from its foreign policy vis-à-vis. For example, “recognition of Russia's security interests in Russia”. It is absolutely obvious that this is an inalienable right of any sovereign state, absolutely corresponding to the norms of international law. In the same way, Russia has the full right to pursue, as the United States and any other country in the world, so that its interests cannot be ignored without consequences. I would like to emphasize once again that in these American expert level assessments there is not even a hint of the sheer crime and compromising material that the American mass propaganda sews Russia.
There is nothing out of the ordinary that the modern Russia is not ready to go on reconciliation with the West, making new concessions to it. Given the fact that the West used the post-Soviet weakening of Russia to the maximum, up to the organization of a coup in Ukraine and actually moving the control zone of the western military bloc to the outskirts of Moscow, Russia has nowhere to physically retreat. Therefore, it is not surprising that she considers her concession limit fully exhausted.
The United States itself would feel exactly as uncomfortable if Russia deployed troops in Mexico and Cuba (as America did in the Baltic States and Ukraine) and supported, for example, the arrival of power in Texas to local supporters of independence from the United States.
In other words, if we approach the evaluation of the response of the Russian Federation from the point of view of the standards adopted in America for a similar situation, then they are not just adequate, but probably even softer and more restrained than the US would have been in such a case.
The American general in the official document simply cannot speak otherwise, because it will mean his country's written refusal of everything that forms the foundation of relations between states and nations throughout the world. stories. And within the framework of this indestructible standard, he involuntarily forced to conclude that there is nothing particularly unusual in Russian policy and there is nothing out of the ordinary. In the same vein, the rest of the evaluative judgments of the US RUMO report on Russian topics are also maintained:
"Russia views the United States as the main threat to its national security and geopolitical ambitions and is developing its own armed forces to repel all potential threats, as well as to achieve its foreign policy goals."
And still Russia would not consider the USA as such threat! There are plenty of legitimate reasons for this. The United States armed to the teeth, having a military budget 15 times more Russian! From the American point of view, this alone is quite enough to recognize such a country as the number one threat and take all measures to strengthen its defense. That is, the Russian Federation and here operates within the framework of generally accepted, in fact, American logic.
But America, moreover, demonstrates its complete disregard for international law and the legitimate interests of other peoples and states, constantly interfering in their internal affairs, everywhere supporting state coups, insurrections and civil wars. And sometimes even committing military aggression, for example in Syria. without any legal basis.
Dealing with such an extremely dangerous and, in a bad sense, predictable state, any country, including Russia, would do exactly what General Robert Ashley writes about - “developed its armed forces to repel potential threats”. But then what are your complaints about the Russian Federation, gentlemen from Washington, if Russia is doing exactly what you yourself would have done in such a situation?
"The Kremlin’s objectives include influencing the states of the former Soviet Union, preventing further NATO expansion to the east, and ensuring that no major international issues are resolved without Russian participation or at its expense. The Kremlin views powerful strategic nuclear forces as the basis for national security. Desire Moscow to be recognized as a great power requires the presence of modern and well-trained armed forces, and Moscow pays considerable attention and resources to improving military technology. . Nicks and control systems for the Kremlin a task of paramount importance - to modernize the strategic nuclear forces, to maintain nuclear parity with the United States and improve the survivability of nuclear weapons, as well as objects, which could escape the country's leadership, in the case of high-precision weapons or nuclear strike "
Even if you study these American official assessments with the help of a magnifying glass, it is absolutely impossible to find anything supernatural in almost any independent and self-conscious country in the world. The desire of the Russian Federation to influence the states of its closest environment, elementary preventing them from becoming pockets of extreme hostility, against the background of the fact that the United States itself declares practically all regions of the planet its “vital interests”, looks like a menu of a vegetarian planted on a strict diet.
About the rest of the "Moscow tricks", such as "preventing the expansion of NATO to the East", "ensuring that no major international issues are resolved without Russia or at its expense." “The desire to be recognized as a great power,” and so on, is generally ridiculous to speak of as evidence of special ambition and, even more so, the aggressiveness of the Russian Federation. Since all this is a mandatory minimum of foreign policy activity for any self-respecting country. And Ashley’s words that the Russian Federation is seeking to preserve nuclear parity with the United States speak about anything, but not about the desire of Moscow to ensure military superiority over America.
Thus, the overall result of the assessment of Russia's actions in the international arena, sounded from a highly competent and responsible official American source, can be considered a full recognition of the obvious fact that the modern Russian Federation is a quite common large state with such a standard set of geopolitical interests national security. That is, such an international player who does not impose any special and, especially, going beyond the generally accepted, requirements for other world players. And from this follows. that the Russian Federation is quite an adequate partner, with whom the same United States, provided they recognize common to all the rules of the game, may well find a common language and mutually acceptable solutions to controversial issues.
And now let us move to another estimated coast, where on the same days a roughly equal format sounded and, we will understand - to the same extent objective, an assessment of the US world role given by the head of the RF Security Council, Army General Nikolai Patrushev.
An assessment that is very different from the American assessment of Russia. recognizing its geopolitical normality, precisely by the fact that it categorically denies such normality for the United States.
"The West is actively using power methods to promote its own interests, trying to devalue the potential of international law and a number of multilateral institutions, is seeking to solve its own problems at the expense of the security of others," Patrushev said at a plenary session of the scientific council under the RF Security Council.
"The intervention of the United States and individual EU countries in the internal affairs of sovereign states, an attempt to redraw the borders, incitement of ethnic and confessional clashes, and the imposition of their values without taking into account national aspects led to the transformation of vast territories of the Middle East, North and Central Africa into chaos, into a nutrient medium for terrorism. "
It is difficult to find in these assessments of a high-level Russian state expert at least one comma, which would not correspond to the real state of affairs, the facts of the global foreign policy of the United States and the entire West governed by them. This is the case. Full disregard for the norms of international law, attempts to empower themselves with exclusive powers to decide the fate of other nations and states, up to the completely manic declaration of their own exclusiveness from the United Nations rostrum - this is quite Hitler's set of delusional ideas on the basis of which Washington is trying to build its relations with the outside world . In which there are no more, perhaps, such abominations and such a measure of cynicism, which have not yet surpassed the United States.
They are to blame for everything, always and in everything except themselves. Syria because it wants to have a legitimate government and a peaceful life. Turkey, because it does not want, in spite of America, to have at its side the “great Kurdistan” which is deadly dangerous for it. Yugoslavia was to blame only for being a Slavic superpower in the Balkans. North Korea is declared “the enemy of all mankind” only because the States urgently needed to infringe on China, in the form of strengthening its own industrial power. But Russia in general should not exist in its current form simply because it has too much natural wealth that the West needs as a passion.
If the same American General Ashley was instructed to make an objective report on the real nature of world politics in his own country, then, being an honest officer, he would have been obliged to shoot himself. Because it is impossible to defend, and even more justify, the global gangster chaos that the United States is doing, while remaining at least minimally a decent person. So thanks to him and that he wrote about Russia.
And for us, a comparison of these two polar assessments is another reason to understand where, in fact, the legs grow from quite possible in the future new world war, “who is xy” in this world and where exactly “the dog rummaged”. American dog, of course.