Russia's policy in the Ukrainian crisis is a logical link in the process that we have been seeing for a long time. It is called the strengthening of Russia. However, you need to understand that such a project is inevitably accompanied by the free application "Cold War 2.0". Recently, it was officially announced by NATO Secretary General A. Rasmussen. It is time to understand what it is, what threatens us and what opportunities it gives.
In a public address on Wednesday, the head of NATO, Rasmussen, accused Russia of trying revisionism and using brute force to solve its geopolitical tasks. "We thought that this behavior went into history. It turns out not yet, ”said the head of the organization that had recently tormented Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, continues to occupy Afghanistan. But this is not the point, but the fact that, according to the Secretary General, Russia's actions in Ukraine have changed the world and now the West needs to unite to counteract our ambitions. What follows from this?
First, we were openly recognized as the main opponent. Thank you, we tried. Said this is one of the key officials of the Western world, which means that soon such an opinion will become dominant. I recall that in the midst of the last presidential campaign in the United States, Obama's opponent Mitt Romney also called our country "the main geopolitical opponent" and relied on cooling relations with us if elected. However, on this and burned. Rate how the world has changed in just two years.
Secondly, there is simply no other way for the United States, whose position is voiced by Rasmussen. The American hawks were defeated in 2012, but Obama seemed to clear their way to the next election, demonstrating a failed national policy, losing to Russia over and over again - in the situation around Syria, with Snowden, and now with the Crimea. There is no doubt that in the next election his opponents will recall all these defeats, and it does not matter that Obama personally will no longer claim power. As we know, a person in the political traditions of the United States is of secondary importance.
In fact, this series of losses for the United States is very alarming. The position of the world hegemon eliminates such a long political retreat. If you can not answer, then you are not a hegemon at all. And if the same opponent inflicts defeats to you, it means that the palm of the world championship will sooner or later pass to him. This, as you understand, specifically for the United States means the end of the story.
The situation has gone so far that they simply have no choice other than to initiate a new round of the Cold War. Hot - not pulled, but cold - completely. The word "reset" is now long out of the political lexicon.
Thirdly, the cold war as such has not yet begun, but we are on its threshold. It is unlikely that the tomahawk will be discovered by Obama, most likely, this honorable duty will be given to another figure - even the most likely candidate to date, former head of the State Department Hillary Clinton. So, Obama will not give us any serious answer, and perhaps even make some more concessions to aggravate the situation and not leave other options for the western voter and public opinion. I believe that if events develop as rapidly as they do now, then impeachment is not excluded. Let me remind you that this procedure according to the law is initiated by the House of Representatives, and its current speaker, John Beyner, is known for his long-standing Russophobic position. Here is a fresh quote from it:
“No, I have never met Putin and do not want to do this. Actually, I think he is a gangster. That he behaves with the powers neighboring Russia is rather disrespectful and rude. In truth, I think that President Barack Obama should rebuff the Russian leader and better protect the interests of our allies, especially in Eastern Europe. ”
By the way, it was said in January 2014 of the year, that is, before the Crimean events. In Obama's place, I would think hard.
Now a little about the findings.
First: the world is again divided into two parts. He has already cracked, and the failure will only spread. I do not see anything terrible for us. On the contrary, reaching a new level of geopolitical confrontation may be a chic historical chance for us. It so happened that all the ups in our history accounted for periods of intense rivalry with the real enemy. And the worse the enemy and the stronger the opposition, the higher were our ups (up to space) with the attendant, naturally, costs. I dare to suggest that the American hawks are guided by exactly the same logic: they see in our real rivalry the only chance to avoid the economic and political collapse of their country. This is the same Rasmussen, after all, it’s not just that it calls for rallying against Russia, but transparently hinting at the need to increase the organization’s budget. But this is only one aspect of cooling relations.
Second the conclusion is that if the world has already split into two parts, then there are few who can sit on two halves at once. And this means that the multi-vector policy will become a thing of the past, and only those countries which, in the conditions of the Cold War, are given the role of intermediary, can save it. China, for example. But it is certain that Europe will have to be determined, since it will simply not be allowed to maintain the current level of trade relations with Russia in the face of opposition from overseas. And most likely, she will not support, even to the detriment of herself.
In a separate line, I would like to note skilfully seized for 20 years the multi-vector policy of the leaders of the former Soviet republics. They don’t have any options at all: either they take sides, or the crowd breaks them into pieces on their own "Maidan". In this regard, I would like to once again marvel at the foresight of Nursultan Abishevich Nazarbayev, who was the first and so far the only one who recognized the legitimacy of the referendum in the Crimea. The rest of us are still thinking in the hope that maybe now it will carry it and everything will calm down in time.
The third the conclusion is that war is not without costs. And even many of those who are voting today for cooling relations with the West and for picking up Russian lands tomorrow may repent of their position. Certainly in this he will be helped in every way from that side. Just because such is human nature - to be for all good things, preferably on a full stomach and safe. This factor must be taken into account in order not to get a split of the existing country instead of gathering.