Geopolitical projections of the second front
President Vladimir Putin’s visit to Normandy at the celebration of the 70 anniversary of the Allied landing demonstrates that Russia is giving credit to the opening of the second front and the contribution of the Allies to victory.
In the framework of this article, I would like to consider both the immediate and remote consequences that the opening of the second front entailed, in their projection on the modern international security system, their impact on the national security of the Russian Federation.
NEW WORLD ORDER
On a global long-term scale, one of the most important outcomes of the war was the creation by the allies of the United Nations as the central element of a new world order based on the rule of law and justice. Time has shown that it is only possible to use the potential of the UN effectively together, without any claims to unconditional leadership in the world and attempts to impose one’s vision of the world order.
Along with this, the transformation of the modern world is directly connected with one of the main geopolitical consequences of opening a second front — the large-scale economic, political and military presence of the United States in Europe on a permanent basis established since the middle of the 50-s.
In this context, the opening of the second front, along with strategic military considerations dictated by the situation on the fronts of World War II, pursued long-term strategic goals that can be correlated with four levels. The results obtained in achieving each of these goals, to this day, have a serious impact on the development of the security situation in the Euro-Atlantic region and beyond.
The first level is resource.
In this context, it should be mentioned that another global consequence of the war that ended was the disintegration of the colonial system, which took several decades. In the period from 1943 to 1970, about 100 new sovereign states emerged in place of colonies and politically dependent countries in the place of colonies and politically dependent countries. The acquisition of independence by the former colonies put the Western states in the face of the need to find new ways to meet their own resource needs, which underlies many modern conflicts.
Along with this, in the short term, the landing of Allied troops in Normandy and further successful advance into Europe allowed the Western Allies, first of all, the USA, to get access to the most important scientific and technical developments and equipment in the shortest possible time (in 11 months). weapons, industrial capacities, as well as the unique personnel potential of scientific workers in Germany, Italy and some other countries.
Today, everything that has been promptly exported from these states to the United States and subsequently used in the interests of accelerated development of scientific developments, has been introduced into industrial production, is known in sufficient detail. Many authoritative studies of domestic and foreign experts are devoted to this issue. Suffice it to mention, for example, seized in Germany aviation and rocket technology, the use of which allowed the United States to become one of the leaders in many fields of science and technology.
Under the tight control of the United States for many years were put many areas of research, entire industries of Western Europe.
The second level is geostrategic.
After the end of the war and the establishment in Europe of its military presence, the United States created the prerequisites for access to the Eurasian space. Using the opportunities that have opened up, Washington has begun implementing the Atlantis strategy, designed for many years, aimed at ensuring control over the countries of Europe and, in a wider geographical and temporal context, over the central communication system of Eurasia.
The subsequent collapse of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact, the temporary weakening of Russia allowed the United States to get unique opportunities to influence in the right direction for itself in Eastern Europe and the former post-Soviet space, including Ukraine, the Caucasus and Central Asia. The tragic consequences of such a development, related to the weakening of the state’s influence in the area of its strategic interests, are analyzed, for example, in the article by Sergey Brezkun (HBO, No. XXUMX of 19 June 06 of the Year).
Level three - cultural and civilizational.
In the postwar years, the consolidation of the United States in Europe as the leading economic, political, and military force led to a powerful American cultural expansion in the countries of the Old World. In France, Germany, Italy and many other European states, which for many centuries determined the level and main directions of development not only of European, but of all world culture, under the pressure of the American "mass culture" state-centrist cultural models were significantly weakened. traditional forms of cultural organization and cultural life have lost much of their value. As a result, a new specific type of culture is being formed - a substantially Americanized global culture that does not have any rigid localization centers, without a peculiar “territorial linkage”.
With reference to the situation in the cultural field of Russia, Russian President Vladimir Putin noted that the loss of one’s own “cultural face”, a national cultural code weakens society, and a society in which cultural tradition is dissolved is easily manipulated, immunity to all sorts of extremist, destructive, aggressive ideas.
At the present stage, the interaction of cultures takes place not so much in the traditional form of mutual enrichment as in the form of intense competition and conflict.
Intense competition and conflicts are a kind of business card of the fourth - the military-strategic level of the geopolitical projection of the second front in the Euro-Atlantic zone.
After the end of the war, our Western allies very quickly forgot about the kind words and thanks to the USSR and the heroic Soviet army, for which they were so generous during the war years. 5 March 1946 in Fulton (Missouri, USA) Winston Churchill said: "From Stettin on the Baltic to Trieste on the Adriatic, an iron curtain fell over Europe."
These were the first volleys of the unfolding Cold War - a global geopolitical, military, economic and ideological confrontation between the USSR and its allies - on the one hand, and the United States and its allies - on the other, which lasted from 1946 to 1991 year (45 years). Over time, the confrontation became an element of the ideology of the two sides and helped the leaders of the military-political blocs to consolidate allies around themselves "in the face of an external enemy."
NATO NEEDS PEACE
One of the first steps taken by Washington against the background of a unfolding confrontation and influencing the further development of the military-political situation in the world was the creation in the 1949 of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as a powerful structure of military-military pressure on its recent ally, the Soviet Union which quickly became the main strategic opponent.
After the disappearance of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact Organization, the United States decided not only to maintain NATO, but also launched an initiative to expand the alliance, including at the expense of the republics of the former Soviet Union. Thus, the military and geopolitical occupation of the space unfolded, which Russia left because of its weakness - starting with the Balkans, the Baltic and the Black Sea, including Transcaucasia and Central Asia. The Alliance has begun systematic preparations for the fulfillment of its new global role - to ensure the interests of the West and, above all, the United States around the globe, to establish the priority of the Euro-Atlantic civilization in the world community.
Such actions by the US and NATO military-power tandem indicate Western claims for a key role in the processes associated with the dynamic transformation of the entire system of international relations, which seems to be characterized by two mutually exclusive tendencies.
The first is connected with the strengthening of the economic and political positions of Russia, China, India and a number of other states, their integration associations, with the improvement of the mechanisms of multilateral management of international processes.
The second tendency is manifested through the attempts of the US and NATO to create a structure of international relations based on the dominance of developed Western countries with American leadership in the world arena and designed for one-sided, primarily military-force, solutions to key problems on the planet, bypassing the UN and fundamental norms of international law.
The strategy of atlantism is aimed at global domination of Washington in a radically reformatted world. Today, the process of reformatting within the Euro-Atlantic security space is determined by several powerful vectors: the war in Ukraine, the upcoming withdrawal of the US and NATO from Afghanistan, the US plans to transfer the strategic focus of efforts from Euro-Atlantic to the Asia-Pacific region.
The resultant of these vectors determines the actions of the United States and its allies, which are based on the understanding that without domination over Eurasia, a global redistribution of resources to their own benefit cannot be achieved.
Attempts to establish such domination should be opposed to the national strategy of the Russian Federation, based on forecasting and strategic planning of the country's sustainable development.
In this context, Russia's steps to improve the defense potential, create and develop the Eurasian Economic Union, strengthen the CSTO, and develop strategic partnership with China and ties within the framework of the SCO and BRICS seem timely and adequate.
The current cooling of relations with the West does not remove from the agenda cooperation with the United States, NATO and the EU, which should develop to the extent and on those issues that are necessary and beneficial to us in terms of our national interests. At the same time, it is necessary to resolutely oppose all attempts to impose decisions on Russia that do not correspond to its goals. There should be no euphoria or blind rejection of such cooperation. There should be a well-defined pragmatic position. In all circumstances, it is undesirable for us to isolate ourselves from the West. Russia needs a multi-vector policy, which should be determined solely by its own national interests.
Information