Military Review

Can the confrontation between Russia and Turkey lead to the Third World War? (Atlantico, France)

35
Can the confrontation between Russia and Turkey lead to the Third World War? (Atlantico, France)

On Friday in an interview with the German newspaper Handelsblatt, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said that sending ground troops to Syria could lead to another world war. Such strong personalities as Putin and Erdogan, probably, could generate it, although in the long run potential escalation should be wary of other players.


Atlantico: What are the hegemonic actions and ambitions of Putin and Erdogan pose a threat to the global “order”?

Roland Lombardi (Roland Lombardi)
: Although the majority of Western media and a number of “human rights” ideologists completely divorced from reality periodically call Putin’s Russia a threat to world security, I think it’s worth restoring certain truths. In the Syrian crisis, the game of Moscow is clear and consistent. Recall, once again, that Russian intervention in Syria is aimed at performing three tasks: restoring the status of a regional or even world power with a key role in resolving conflicts (in parallel, this also includes demonstrating the illogical behavior of the West); support of the Assad regime in order to become the only stronghold on the way of Al-Qaida and the Islamic State; active and widespread struggle against political and radical Islamism, which poses a threat to Russian territory (20 of millions of Muslims live in the country).
How do these goals pose a threat to the West? On the contrary, you need to be a complete idiot or blind to not notice that when Russia defends its interests in the Middle East, it simultaneously protects the interests of Europe and France.

Do I have to say that the terrorists who hit France in 2015, did not act on the orders of Moscow? Or remind that it is not Russia that finances and supports the imams-Salafis or immigrants from the Muslim Brotherhood (in Russia both of these movements, by the way, are prohibited), who preach aggression and hatred of our country in some French mosques? Our diplomacy, especially judging by the latest statements by Fabius before retirement, forgot too quickly that Russia was the first to support our intervention in Mali in 2013. And who offered us cooperation when we sent the fleet and aircraft to the Eastern Mediterranean in response to the November terrorist attacks? Russia again! Russia is a European power, it does not in any way threaten our interests. The Russians are our allies, and they demand nothing more. We face the same threats, overcome some obstacles. Together we could do a lot more.

Finally, do not be deceived: at the moment, the only threat to the world order comes from our Turkish and Saudi "allies." The very people whose double play with terrorist and Islamist groups is now on public display. Those who wanted to plant the Salafi and the Muslim Brotherhood in Damascus and all Arab capitals on the wave of the Arab Spring ...

Cyrille Bret:
I would not say that they actually have some hegemonic ambitions. Despite the currently adopted strategy, the Russian Federation is more likely to adhere to defensive positions. She seeks to defend what else remains of her from the former zone of influence. In particular, this concerns Syria with a base in Tartus, an alliance with Assad, the restoration of the Shiite axis, which includes Syria and Iran, the traditional markets weapons since Xnumx's. It seems to me that this is not about hegemonic ambitions, but about the desire to protect the remnants of the former brilliance of the two great non-Arab powers of the Middle East. The similarity concerns the rigidity of defensive positions.

As for the risks and threats to the world, I would say that they are very symmetrical.

On the part of Turkey, the risk lies in enhancing the religious nature of international relations in the Middle East, since the Justice and Development Party since its coming to power expands ties with the Sunnis (this was evident in Syria).

On the part of Russia, the risk of intervention in Syria implies the potential impossibility of a political settlement as a result of attacks on both the Islamist and non-Islamist opposition ...

- Putin is credited with the desire to restore the borders of the USSR ...

Cyril Bret:
This is a rhetorical and ideological motive that slipped in the statements of Putin himself, the book of Michel Eltchaninoff, etc. But this is only an ideological discourse divorced from reality. In fact, Russia is not in a position to claim a certain imperial future in the foreseeable future. Its economy is greatly undermined by a number of external and internal factors.

- Erdogan and Putin - this is the sultan and king of the modern era? What indicates their inflated ego (and potential danger)?

Roland Lombardi:
As the historian Jean-Baptiste Duroselle perfectly demonstrated (Jean-Baptiste Duroselle), the psychological profile of heads of state is of great importance in international relations. In addition, a politician or statesman without a bloated ego is a very rare case ...

Putin and Erdogan are charismatic and strong personalities, powerful and confident people. At the same time, both of them are characterized by great realism and pragmatism. The problem is that if the president of Russia could really be called a new king due to the diplomatic successes and the return of his country to the first roles in the international arena, you cannot say the same about Erdogan. If he dreamed of becoming a new sultan, his idea failed. All the hegemonic projects of the Turkish president in the region are crumbling. He found himself isolated in regional politics (particularly in the Syrian issue) and enjoys the support of Saudi Arabia alone. From here follows a certain frustration and, indeed, a potential danger in its decisions ...

Cyrille Bret: This is a serious simplification. The Economist has been behaving like this for more than a year now: they are regularly called the Sultan and the King on editorials. But their positions are very different for the reasons I mentioned above.

As for personal qualities and bloated ego, this was fully confirmed for Erdogan over the past decade and a half, as well as for Vladimir Putin. Both of them identify themselves with the state and are for most of the public a symbol of the restoration of the political power of their countries. The extraordinary personalization of their political projects (especially for Erdogan) leads to the fact that they actually begin to show imperial features.

This is their strength (they inspire their personality, cause a wave of enthusiasm), but at the same time weakness. For example, during the incident in Turkish airspace a little over a month ago, this is what made dialogue impossible. That is, a leader who is so eager to personalize power and international strategy is a double-edged sword for the country.

- How does Turkey use migrants to put pressure on Europe and the world, thereby inclining the balance of forces in its favor?

Roland Lombardi:
Simply put, Turkey is now accepting two million refugees on its territory (mainly Syrians) and threatens to open the way to Europe if it does not receive financial aid from Brussels (it has already been allocated three billion euros) and diplomatic support in the Syrian issue.

- Doesn't such internationalization of the conflict resemble the 1930-s civil war in Spain? And does Syria look like the instability of the Balkans at the beginning of the 20th century?

Cyril Bret:
Christopher Clark's book "Somnambula" (Christopher Clark, Les somnambules) tells about the rival hegemonic projects in the Balkans before the outbreak of the First World War. This analysis has greatly changed our perception of conflict. According to Clark, the cause of the war was the irresponsibility of the Russian imperial project.

Now the alignment is completely different, because the two protagonists you mentioned, and also Saudi Arabia and Iran, do not adhere to the dynamics of the ideological confrontation between the two main types of power: the republican anticlerical Spanish democracy and expansionist totalitarianism. In other words, it does not seem to me that the Balkans and the Spanish Civil War have much in common with the Syrian conflict.

I think the conflict in Syria should be considered as a consequence of the collapse of the state that no longer exists today. This gives impetus to the development strategies and the protection of territorial interests, which geographically and economically revolve around the power of Assad. That is why they are now talking about the prospect of dividing Syria, although this was not considered as a decision either in Spain or in the Balkans.

- What can be said about the forced militarization of Russia? Can Russia and Turkey provoke the Third World War?

Cyril Bret:
In 2008, Vladimir Putin spoke in the Duma about the need to increase military credits. Since 2009, the defense budget has been significantly increased, exceeding the mark in 4% of GDP. Army staff amounted to 800 - 850 thousand people. This is a new wave of modernization of the Russian armed forces, which was an attempt to catch up after the neglect of the first post-Soviet years.

As for World War I, I would again like to return to the comparison with Clark. It seems to me that the cause of a world conflict could be the clash of two or three imperial expansionism in a strategic region. In Syria, nothing of the kind is out of the question. Saudi Arabia and Iran are playing the leading roles there more likely: they set the tone, have the most accurate and decisive plans in the region.

Again, Russia and Turkey are defending geographically and militarily limited interests. For Russia, everything is simple: it seeks to preserve the client, that is, the Assad clan, whose stronghold is Latakia (northeast of the country). Turkey adheres to a strategy of influence, which is directed against the restoration of the Shiite axis. That is, although these countries attract the most attention to themselves, they do not set the tone. Their leaders are very well known, loud statements are peculiar to them. It is difficult to imagine Hassan Rouhani or Crown Prince Muhammad ibn Salman (occupies the second step in the succession) as military leaders who are conducting an active information and political campaign.

Roland Lombardi:
It is foolish to assume that Russia wants to start the Third World War. Despite considerable ambitions about his country, Putin has established himself as an excellent tactician and subtle strategist who knows how to take advantage of the weaknesses and hesitations of his opponents. He is a true statesman who maintains calm and composure in all situations, including many of the crises that have befallen his country. Like it or not, in Syria, Russia offers the most serious and rational decision that meets the common interests.

The Russian president secured not only military assistance from Iran and diplomatic assistance from China, but also support from Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, and even Israel. The Kurds are also increasingly oriented towards Moscow. The positions of America, despite a series of ostentatious statements, are changing ...

Be that as it may, Washington has long sought to overthrow Assad. The Americans supported the rebels and gradually increased pressure in the negotiations at the UN. However, this project is now in doubt: the impressive offensive of Aleppo (and throughout the country) by the Syrian government, Hezbollah and Iranian special forces with the support of the Russian aviation forced the US to reconsider its position on the Syrian crisis (these changes are noticeable both in public opinion, and among strategists and Pentagon generals).

In addition, it is less than a year before Obama’s term ends, and it’s hard for me to imagine that he will start an open conflict with Russia for the sake of Arabians and Turks.

At the same time, the tension between Turkey and Russia in Syria reached an unprecedented level. As I noted earlier, Ankara and Riyadh are in this issue more and more isolated (even Qatar left the game). They lose a lot. Especially Turkey. That is why the Turks in a panic attack thoughtlessly threaten intervention in Syria (with the support of Arabians). And not for strikes on IS, but for the sake of saving their proteges and shelling the Kurds (and they are for us brave and valuable allies against the "Islamic State"). In addition, by blocking the current talks, they, paradoxically, give Russia extra time to bombard all indiscriminately opponents of Assad. Turks experience anger and frustration, they get the feeling that the Americans abandoned them. Therefore, they can do unpredictable. The main danger is that Erdogan will give the army an order to cross the Syrian border. Thus, it will violate international law, because it will operate without the mandate of the UN Security Council (Russia and China, no doubt, will use the veto). He is counting on escalation and a mistake on the part of Russia to take advantage of Article Five, which would oblige NATO to come to his aid. And it would have turned into a disaster. It is worth waiting for new provocations, similar to the Russian bomber shot down last year. It remains to hope that the Russians will not fall into another trap and will again be able to keep cool. It would be good, and if the Americans somehow forced the anxious "ally" to come to their senses ...

Cyril Bree is a lecturer at the Paris Institute of Political Studies, author of the Eurasia Prospective blog.

Roland Lombardi is an independent consultant and analyst at JFC-Conseil. Specialist in International Relations, the Maghreb and the Middle East.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.atlantico.fr/decryptage/tsar-contre-sultan-choc-russie-turquie-en-syrie-est-en-train-faire-plonger-vers-3eme-guerre-mondiale-cyrille-bret-roland-2589418.html
35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. From Samara
    From Samara 18 February 2016 18: 25
    -1
    You can safely strike at Turkey! Armageddon will not be!
    1. Malachite
      Malachite 18 February 2016 18: 28
      12
      Erdogan is still very cowardly ... It is unlikely that someone will harness for him against Russia! I think to be Kurdish autonomy yet ... I just for!
      1. Uncle VasyaSayapin
        Uncle VasyaSayapin 18 February 2016 18: 32
        +1
        No for him, but he can start a war. Kurdish Americans have been patronizing for so many years - in vain or something.
        1. KAV
          KAV 18 February 2016 19: 52
          33
          Well, if war breaks out, then you have to ...
      2. Altona
        Altona 18 February 2016 20: 33
        +3
        Quote: Malachite
        Erdogan is still very cowardly ..

        ------------------
        Erdogan began to realize that no one would fit into Turkey. No one is interested in contributing to the revival of the Ottoman Empire-2.0. The idea with the downing of the Su-24 drove Erdogan into a narrow corridor of decisions and the moderation of his ambitions.
      3. INVESTOR
        INVESTOR 18 February 2016 21: 06
        +5
        Can the confrontation between Russia and Turkey lead to the Third World?

        Can. Easy.
    2. Giant thought
      Giant thought 18 February 2016 18: 29
      0
      We are peaceful people, but our armored train stands on a siding, we do not advise Turkey to test our aircraft at the fortress, otherwise Turkey will no longer be at all.
    3. GSH-18
      GSH-18 18 February 2016 18: 36
      26
      Strong personalities like Putin and Erdogan

      What "smart guy" put PUTIN on a par with this crafty pirdogan ???? fool
      1. sgazeev
        sgazeev 18 February 2016 20: 18
        +4
        Quote: GSH-18
        Strong personalities like Putin and Erdogan

        What "smart guy" put PUTIN on a par with this crafty pirdogan ???? fool
    4. tol100v
      tol100v 18 February 2016 18: 37
      0
      Quote: From Samara
      You can safely strike at Turkey! Armageddon will not be!

      No blows are needed. They will calm down by themselves. And the fact that ALL the development of tension was commanded, not directed, by the State Department, do not go to a fortune-teller! Seeing in the actions of the Russian Aerospace Forces of the global SPLASH, they decided to say goodbye to Erdogan on the sly. They don't need unmanageable. They themselves are already afraid of the term "uncontrollable" (chaos), because they do not know what to do with this!
    5. Great-grandfather of Zeus
      Great-grandfather of Zeus 18 February 2016 18: 37
      -7
      From Samara - what will you beat in Turkey with your fist or shoe?
      1. Great-grandfather of Zeus
        Great-grandfather of Zeus 18 February 2016 19: 08
        +1
        There are courageous men on the site - just explain to me what the cons are, or the main thing is to screw up and wave your saber?
        1. Fat
          Fat 18 February 2016 23: 03
          +3
          Quote: Great-grandfather of Zeus
          There are courageous men on the site - just explain to me what the cons are, or the main thing is to screw up and wave your saber?

          I am not a man, "men are plowing in the field", not a Cossack, they are "waving a sword." I served as a clerk in the headquarters ... I will try to explain. Within the framework of the dialogue, two Western "analysts" are trying to take the point of view of the Russian leadership and play a "business game" fashionable in the 90s, in the Union it was called "command and staff exercises." An amendment is made for the "hybridity" and "network-centricity" of the war of the XNUMXst century. Introductory - likely answer.
          IMHO Review - a plus, "game" - a minus, because there is not enough initial information (and becomes outdated to a full assessment) and dubious motivation for the actions of the opposing sides. The article deserves attention.
        2. avia1991
          avia1991 19 February 2016 00: 56
          +6
          Quote: Great-grandfather of Zeus
          just tell me what the cons

          It can only be explained by emotions, as I understand it - the people really want to get Erdogash in the teeth from ours! .. No one thinks at the same time at what cost the victory will get. You can argue as much as you like on the topic "nihto will not harness the Turks" - but these are just words, but in fact, the situation can be played up so that NATO will be obliged to enter into force of internal rules: for example, a large-scale provocation can be arranged on the border, forcing our The Aerospace Forces use force across Turkey. And then there will be no time to prove that “we are not aggressors” ..
          My opinion: although this is not accepted in international politics, but Erdik must be "brought down" - qualitatively and tightly, with the use of forces that "know HOW to do it, and CAN do it" (said by Putin about the disconnection of special communication between Kiev and Crimea) soldier
          1. 72jora72
            72jora72 19 February 2016 06: 16
            0
            Dear avia1991, Do not you find that this post contradicts itself?
            1. avia1991
              avia1991 19 February 2016 12: 15
              0
              Quote: 72jora72
              You do not find that this post contradict themselves?

              What is the contradiction, colleague and namesake? wink
              If we say "to the teeth" - then there is no contradiction: I propose not to fight with the Turks, which the progenitor of Zeus opposed, and for which he earned disadvantages, but to destroy the specific Evil, in the person of Erdogad himself, with a point strike. THIS IS NOT ACCEPTED in politics, and even Parashenko, as we see, nobody touches (although it is a pity that Trutnev restrained laughing ) - but Erdogan threatens, in essence, the security of the entire region, and possibly the whole world, since his actions are essentially terrorist. And as you know, terrorism must be fought with the method of its destruction!
              That's something like hi
              If I didn’t understand you, decrypt it in more detail. wink
        3. starper
          starper 19 February 2016 04: 39
          -1
          Wherever I go, the same thing everywhere, ala, hoo, drive the geese. How crazy they were!
    6. GSH-18
      GSH-18 18 February 2016 18: 43
      +2
      Our diplomacy, especially judging by the recent statements by Fabius before his resignation, too quickly forgot that Russia was the first to support our intervention in Mali in 2013. And who offered us cooperation when we sent a fleet and planes to the Eastern Mediterranean in response to the November attacks? Russia again! Russia is a European power, it does not in any way threaten our interests. The Russians are our allies, and they do not require anything more. We face the same threats, we overcome only obstacles. Together we could do much more.

      Quite sound thoughts! Where are you? CIA, NSA and amerobaz not doze off? Overboard them! Sooner or later, you still have to do it!
    7. Tor5
      Tor5 18 February 2016 19: 06
      +6
      Reasonable article, very pragmatic! Unfortunately psychos do not read such ....
      1. Fat
        Fat 18 February 2016 23: 29
        +2
        Quote: Tor5
        Reasonable article, very pragmatic! Unfortunately psychos do not read such ....

        Unfortunately, such materials are read only by "psychos" of traditional orientation. A beautiful "game", very believable. Look who is making these speculations
        Cyril Bree is a lecturer at the Paris Institute of Political Studies, author of the Eurasia Prospective blog.
        Roland Lombardi is an independent consultant and analyst at JFC-Conseil. Specialist in International Relations, the Maghreb and the Middle East.
        IMHO: Such "games" for small stakes are not played. At stake are relations with post-Gaulish and already "social-liberal" France and the Russian Federation. There will be either the end of the next republic, or other, "right-wing" and conservative Frenchmen will come to power, ready to defend the French self-identification, simply - the Honor of the French people.
        1. TTX
          TTX 19 February 2016 02: 57
          0
          Analysts from Europe have accused the GDP and the Turkish line of the crisis in the BV give analogies with the first world, that is, for them there is no Iraq and Libya !? So who is to blame.
    8. The comment was deleted.
    9. Denis Obukhov
      Denis Obukhov 18 February 2016 19: 14
      +4
      It’s strange. I wanted so much to find in an article about stupid Russians, about our rusty tanks, about the Syrian rebel democrats, I found only about the large civilian casualties from Russian undemocratic bombs. It even becomes uncomfortable when you read such French articles
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Aleksander
        Aleksander 18 February 2016 19: 50
        +2
        All Western lovers of bearded "oppositionists" should be asked only one question - who would they prefer to be captured by "bloody Assad or" noble opposition? lol
    10. Civil
      Civil 18 February 2016 19: 36
      +2
      Quote: From Samara
      You can safely strike at Turkey! Armageddon will not be!


      Will you go to war?
    11. gergi
      gergi 18 February 2016 20: 28
      -2
      Turkey surrendered. Russia has carte blanche. If they turn up, no one will die for them. And the toad will not fumble. Erdogash on the ass hair tears.
    12. gya456
      gya456 19 February 2016 11: 42
      +1
      in Turkey it’s not worth it, according to them, Article 5 of NATAh will have to intercede for its Member, but if the Turks cross the border with Syria, then it will be aggression on their part and then we think we will be obliged to punish the aggressor, and by all means and all types of weapons!
  2. Uncle VasyaSayapin
    Uncle VasyaSayapin 18 February 2016 18: 26
    +1
    There will be no third world. Otherwise, they would not have scared anyone. Nuclear powers will not fight among themselves. And without them, it would no longer be global. But the development of existing regional conflicts and the emergence of new ones is unlikely to be avoided.
    1. Great-grandfather of Zeus
      Great-grandfather of Zeus 18 February 2016 18: 40
      -5
      Uncle Vasya Syaoping - there will be no third world - there will be the fourth world at once, and the next stone will follow it. ..
    2. 72jora72
      72jora72 19 February 2016 06: 22
      0
      There will be no third world. Otherwise, they would not have scared anyone. Nuclear powers will not fight among themselves. And without them, it would no longer be global. But the development of existing regional conflicts and the emergence of new ones is unlikely to be avoided.
      The fact of the matter is that most of the current Western politicians have completely lost their sense of self-preservation for 25 years, for example, the Washington neocons (and these are the authors of the current US policy), seriously dreaming of a preventive nuclear strike against Russia after which there is no damage from a retaliatory strike minimal ......
  3. midivan
    midivan 18 February 2016 18: 29
    +5
    Quote: From Samara
    You can safely strike at Turkey! Armageddon will not be!

    because of turland there will be no world war 3 but this is not a reason to kindle it and toss firewood into the fire, and I would like to advise fans of blows to go to Donbass to see the consequences, we’ll manage without blows, but you can put Turks in a puddle
    1. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 18 February 2016 19: 21
      +1
      They are already there, in a puddle.
  4. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 18 February 2016 18: 29
    +2
    What are you, all heartless. There is not a drop of sympathy for a person. Yes to a real person, a European, with a capital "E". Not that these Svidomo preparations of men. They give money, they place missile defense. And the country in NATO, they promise to protect against northern barbarians, everyone respects it, they promise to take it in the EU. And Russia’s gas pipeline, the nuclear power plant promises ....
    (Now, if he were smart, then a large number of promises should have been alarming. In the east they say: “Say halva 100 times, it won’t be sweet in your mouth.” And he became. “He’s getting rich with thought.” He saw that richness and it was enough. EU, and looms OBHSS or OBEP)
    And so, in Europe, even more imbued with the greatness of Erdogan, you can throw migrants, terrorists. And ISIS Big Brother spread out behind the fence, taught him how to deal with him. So the sultanate can be stirred up like two fingers. History, tradition, genes ... But then a miracle happened, Big brother received his sight and was surprised: “And why did I give a monkey a grenade?” And the monkey has a reflex: they take it away, it does not let go. I had to put it under the train.
    And why should Big Brother be friends with the monkey forever?
  5. sever.56
    sever.56 18 February 2016 18: 29
    +2
    None of the sane leaders of the West will harness for Turkey ... "They need it" ???
    They will forget about the "fifth article" of the NATO charter, which says that an attack on one of the NATO members is tantamount to an attack on all NATO members. Europe has already been gored by the fact that Erdogan opened the floodgates through which the uncontrolled flow of migrants not only from Syria, but 80% from other countries of the Middle East and North Africa. When in your, previously calm and prosperous country, they begin, sorry for the expression, to fuck women at every step, you have to be a complete woodpecker in order to support the one who provoked the complete "Armageddian" in Europe.
    The discharge of Erdogan will be stopudovy. The West remembers too well the lessons of the Second World War, when it was Russia (the USSR) that multiplied Nazi fascism by zero. Too well, the West appreciates its well-being and peace of mind to be targets for our missiles because of Erdogan’s insane undertakings.
    There will be no third world. There may be a serious military conflict between Russia and Turkey, the result of which will be a significant reduction in the territory of Turkey and the emergence of an independent Kurdistan.
    1. sgazeev
      sgazeev 18 February 2016 20: 26
      -1
      Quote: sever.56
      None of the sane leaders of the West will harness for Turkey ... "They need it" ???
      They will forget about the "fifth article" of the NATO charter, which says that an attack on one of the NATO members is tantamount to an attack on all NATO members. Europe has already been gored by the fact that Erdogan opened the floodgates through which the uncontrolled flow of migrants not only from Syria, but 80% from other countries of the Middle East and North Africa. When in your, previously calm and prosperous country, they begin, sorry for the expression, to fuck women at every step, you have to be a complete woodpecker in order to support the one who provoked the complete "Armageddian" in Europe.
      The discharge of Erdogan will be stopudovy. The West remembers too well the lessons of the Second World War, when it was Russia (the USSR) that multiplied Nazi fascism by zero. Too well, the West appreciates its well-being and peace of mind to be targets for our missiles because of Erdogan’s insane undertakings.
      There will be no third world. There may be a serious military conflict between Russia and Turkey, the result of which will be a significant reduction in the territory of Turkey and the emergence of an independent Kurdistan.

      The first Czechs with Slovaks will take files to the grip, the Bulgarians will give up, the paddlers will calm down in their swamp, another trifle will sniff under the bed, climb, the little shaves will choke or choke on porridge from surprise. wassat
    2. ALABAY45
      ALABAY45 18 February 2016 20: 33
      0
      hi I have always, in such cases, been interested in: in the case, somewhere, squealing, after a grandiose scruff, where is this infantry hoping to hide ?! In the states ?! Hardly repeat , there are enough of their morons! Uruguay, Paraguay, Argentina, like the bonuses of the Third Reich ?! Snout, not that! On, Mars, what ...?! wassat
  6. APASUS
    APASUS 18 February 2016 18: 31
    +3
    Interestingly, NATO becomes a hostage to one not quite adequate pepper. They can’t abandon the Turks, but they will also increase the chance of a military clash with the Russian air forces. Of course there is a way out for the West, but will they want to use it? Erdogan's retirement, you can call it that.
    And now it seems more and more that the West is gathering a group of countries opposing Russia and wants to fight with their hands. Both the SA and Qatar have poked their heads here, in a heap towards Turkey.
  7. Dam
    Dam 18 February 2016 18: 32
    +8
    Any open war with Turkey will weaken us despite the victory in it. In addition, the war will allow mattresses to bring together a scattering NATO and force Europe to pay for the costs of its army. Hybrid is another thing, supporting the Kurds and tearing the Turks to the St. George Cross
  8. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  9. atlantida04
    atlantida04 18 February 2016 18: 42
    0
    Everything is possible, both the 3rd world and the nuclear, but is it necessary ??? response to the headline.
  10. ALABAY45
    ALABAY45 18 February 2016 18: 52
    +2
    "... will the confrontation between Russia and Turkey lead to the Third World War? ..."
    If I, "rafika", a house on my street filming, insolent at the end, hit on an unshaven and whining snout, does it mean that you need to involve the whole street in this pleasant process on my part ?! cooperative, I, in general, keep quiet ... They will tear the bastard into molecules!
  11. cap
    cap 18 February 2016 18: 55
    +2
    "We can only hope that the Russians will not fall into another trap and will be able to maintain their composure again. It would be good if the Americans somehow made their restless 'ally' come to their senses ..."

    It went smoothly on paper. Why did the "partners" not condemn NATO and officially renounce Article 5 with regard to Turkey?
    Pants should be wet before the owner.
    Teachers and consultants. Who is listening to you. All Europe was occupied by migrants through your fault. Russia to remain calm. As well. Cease fire to sit down for negotiations to save valuable personnel for subsequent provocations.
    To fly accompanied by our aircraft depicting a collective struggle, it is possible but to arrange joint work weakly. There are no words alone exclamations. am
  12. Mainbeam
    Mainbeam 18 February 2016 19: 04
    0
    Putin and Erdogan are charismatic and strong personalities, powerful and confident people. At the same time, they both are characterized by great realism and pragmatism

    You can’t say this from news on VO.
    Apparently, I missed something ...

    He expects escalation and an error on the part of Russia in order to take advantage article fivel, which would oblige NATO to come to his aid. Worth waiting for new provocationsSimilar to the Russian bomber shot down last year. It is hoped that the Russians will not fall into another trap and will again be able to remain calm

    Our silence on the downed Su-24 is clear.
    While Erdogan is an aggressor, NATO merges it slowly.
    .
  13. Santjaga_Garka
    Santjaga_Garka 18 February 2016 19: 17
    +1
    Erdogan is actually a hostage to his policy and he simply cannot retreat without losing his face, and he does not care about the interests of the country and this is sad ...
  14. Black Colonel
    Black Colonel 18 February 2016 19: 25
    +1
    "... having blocked the current negotiations, they, paradoxically, give Russia extra time bombing everyone indiscriminately opponents Assad. "
    Highlighted - key phrase. am am am
    1. 72jora72
      72jora72 19 February 2016 06: 27
      0
      additional time to bombard all of Assad's opponents indiscriminately. "
      Highlighted - key phrase. am am am
      Well, excuse me, we don’t understand grades GAVNA
  15. valent45
    valent45 18 February 2016 19: 44
    0
    There will be no third world war because of Ergad. In the West they still understand that he is
    monkey with a grenade. The trouble is that the West does not want (or cannot) it somehow
    guide the true path. Mercantile interests.
  16. wandlitz
    wandlitz 18 February 2016 19: 48
    +1
    It would be good if the Americans somehow made the restless “ally” come to their senses ...It would be good if the Americans had an objective understanding of the situation.
  17. potalevl
    potalevl 18 February 2016 20: 30
    0
    The mattresses brewed this porridge in BV so that others would disentangle it.
  18. iouris
    iouris 18 February 2016 21: 36
    0
    In fact, the question is this: a complete rejection of an independent policy in all areas or a confrontation on the brink of war.
  19. mr.grin19z
    mr.grin19z 18 February 2016 21: 41
    0
    NATO is not fools of soldiers for slaughter they will not send Erdogan
  20. starper
    starper 19 February 2016 05: 08
    0
    How do you know what is going on at the NATO General Staff? Maybe they are just waiting for us to go out? Something was quickly forgotten about the Afghan, there, too, one activist said, yes, they can 'these bearded men in trousers, they could not get out 10 for 15000 years. And here the technique is different and the enemy. Maybe stop waving his checkers, and calmly, without hysterics, lead his line. Even having drawn the sword, it is not necessary to use it, it is enough to keep the enemy at a distance, especially when he is not eager to fight.