At the end of this super-condensed article of modern history, you will know the causes of these American-Russian tensions, and what the outcomes might be. I have taken hundreds of articles and sources and distilled them down for you in this relatively short article.
As unlikely as this post sounds to many of you (I began writing this in 2016, so this if probably not going to sound “unlikely” to you anymore if you read the news at all), there is a escalating level of tension and risk between the USA and Russia, and this post is a summary springboard of all the events that have brought us here, as well as an attempt to explain both sides clearly in an unbiased manner.
No one can escape bias, it’s true, but as of late, there seems to be a lot more of it in the news, so it’s hard to get a clear picture of what really may be going on as the news is having difficulty telling both sides of the story–which is unfortunate, because that is the ideal referred to as “journalism”, but I at least will present facts and statements from both sides here without trying to sway your opinion, because there are no articles available today that try to show the whole scope of the whole situation, and fairly both sides.
First off, let’s cover Russian bias, or propaganda if you will. RT.com (Russian Times) as it is referred to as Putin’s mouthpiece, sometimes with highly unsourced stories, and stories that promote discord here in the USA.
, but I am not sure why anyone thinks all of its stories are false, and that the rest of global media is much different. I find that RT sounds quite similar to several other Western Newspapers I have read leately promoting stories with no foundation whatsoever, or simply repeating something they heard from another paper. Many papers, esp. some British one’s I am thinking about, promote wildy fanciful stories.
Who can argue that most media, esp in power hungry countries, tends to be propagandist for the govt/elite, regardless of the country, including ours? And I am not talking about the direct type, like Operation Mockingbird (CIA infiltrated media), but rather the dialogues that support certain political govt viewpoints, supporting one candidate over the other, or using personal opinion as a guideline for a story.
But even with the propaganda in RT, does that mean all its stories are fake? I find them interesting into seeing into how some of them perceive the United States. For example, Putin’s mocking our leaders increasing control over its citizens in an over-reaching, state controlling nature (e.g. Patriot Act).
So in light of the noise that proliferates the news today, including endless assaults on opponents political parties, what I am watching for instead is: Confidence, actions, and fear.
Over-Confidence:
This is what you really need to know: Both countries are confident that the other side is the aggressor, and it;s really hard to determine the reality of the matter. Perhaps they both are, but in the end it things seem to be driven by fear and economics.
I say economics, because part of my main thesis in other posts is that we are going to go to WW3 because of financial problems, and war is the scramble, and cover, to try to escape it.
Russia has a lot of reasons to be confident, and you can see it in their dialogue. Since the Crimea victory Russia has never had so much confidence but the USA has the same discourse currently. The problem with this is with two countries equally confident in its “I am right and you are wrong” attitude, is it allows for aggressive behavior from both sides, since neither fears the other’s ability to defend.
- United States claims: Claims that Russia is invading the Baltic states, perhaps as an attempt to recreate the Soviet Union. In a world where NATO keeps growing–Ukraine and Montenegro as of late–I would not be surprised if Russia was trying to re-capture these allies that keep defecting, additionally, as they may provide a larger economic security blanket to Russia whenever we put sanctions on them.
- Russia’s claims: NATO is slowly surrounding Russia, most importantly, with missile defense systems, that can easily be used offensively against Russia. If there is one link you should check in this article, this is it. It is Putin explaining that he thinks we are headed to real conflict, and take note, it was the only place I could find the video, so I am not vouching for the quality of the news site in any way.
Possible Putin has ulterior motives? Perhaps Putin is really trying to make Russia look like a victim as a way to unify Russia, amidst growing fight against corruption in Russia’s govt, as well as political opponent. This is plausible, but if Russia does go to war with us, that is a pretty extreme risk to take to keep yourself in office, when your military force is a mere shadow of the opponent (NATO).
Actions
Since actions speak louder than words, and behaviors are more important than attitudes, watching what each country does is far more important than what they say they are doing. Here is a list of actions by each that show what is happening:
In short:
- Russia invades Georgia (2008). Disagreement exists over who started.
- Russia invades Crimea/Ukraine (2014)
- Ukraine has always been split. Part of the country is pro-Russian, and part is pro-Ukrainian. This has always put them on the fence to join NATO. Along with push-back by Russia against them joining EU (fight for money), followed by a pro-west leader, things are not going to get any better. In the end, it;s about money (economic security), and power (military), and everyone wants it. I am not surprised that Russia does not want the Ukraine to join EU/NATO an .
- This statement sums it up well “In the end, Russia will undoubtedly seek to weaken any Ukrainian government that is aligned with and supported by the West, just as the United States and the European Union will do to any that threatens to become a pro-Russia satellite. The manner and intensity of the competition will certainly change over time. But considering that the rivalry for Eurasia has existed between Russia and the West for as long as Ukraine has been a state, it is not a question of whether the contest will continue, but how.”
- In response, we imposed economic sanctions on Russia, and more importantly, NATO build up troops around Baltic states as defense measures, but in so doing also appears to have violated NATO agreement.
- “We are moving closer and closer to a real war. Republicans and Democrats talk tough on foreign policy towards Russia. When all politicians are in agreement, there is no discussion of alternative approaches. Any alternative to complete isolation of Russia and a NATO build up on Russia’s borders is a sign of weakness. Any alternative to this military build up is criticized as “appeasement,” likened to the failed foreign policy of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain toward Nazi Germany between 1937 and 1939.
Liberal Democrats historically are anti-war, but not this time. In the Czech Republic, there was the start of an anti-war movement when NATO paraded its military along its borders. “Tanks but no thanks” became a rallying cry. Czechs became uncomfortable with a muscle flexing approach to the standoff. Only a lone libertarian, Ron Paul raises a critique of the wisdom of this military build up.”
- “We are moving closer and closer to a real war. Republicans and Democrats talk tough on foreign policy towards Russia. When all politicians are in agreement, there is no discussion of alternative approaches. Any alternative to complete isolation of Russia and a NATO build up on Russia’s borders is a sign of weakness. Any alternative to this military build up is criticized as “appeasement,” likened to the failed foreign policy of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain toward Nazi Germany between 1937 and 1939.
- Russia is clearly upset that the US is increasing its balance of power, thereby unsettling the equilibrium that use to exist when both countries had more even power. While MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) still exists, Russia is clearly concerned that everyone is joining NATO, especially their Baltic neighbors.
- Their main qualm is discussed in their national security policy which is that while nuclear war hazard is low, US missile shield threatens Russia’s national security.
- Russia stays true to its international obligations in the arms control, and expects the same from its partners. Washington’s development of its global missile defense system is viewed as a “threat to national security,” with Moscow “reserving the right to take relevant counter measures.”
“Russia stands for constructive cooperation with the US in the field of arms control, with a compulsory allowance for an inseparable correlation between strategic offensive and defense weapons,” the document says. Global strategic stability should be the key factor in possible further arms reduction, it adds.”
- Russia stays true to its international obligations in the arms control, and expects the same from its partners. Washington’s development of its global missile defense system is viewed as a “threat to national security,” with Moscow “reserving the right to take relevant counter measures.”
- Russia seeks alliances with China, India, and even Japan.
I won’t pretend that just one side is at fault, so here you can read both pro and negative views of Putin’s actions, both from he same newspaper:
Pro-Putin: http://observer.com/2015/08/can-the-united-states-stop-a-war-with-russia/
Anti-Putin: http://observer.com/2017/01/russia-vladimir-putin-interests-opposite-united-states-donald-trump/
Just a snippet in case you did not read the above: “In speaking about the Russian Federation, we mean the autocratic regime of Vladimir Putin. Having been under his rule for almost 17 years, freedom of speech is worse than in Zimbabwe or South Sudan: political opponents are shot, journalists are assassinated, history is falsified (even by state laws and repressive means), and most of the major media outlets are effectively commanded by the regime. Incoming National Security Advisor Mike Flynn was right when he said, “Putin is a totalitarian dictator and a thug who does not have our interests in mind.
Putin’s core interest is clear: he wants to stay in power as long as possible. He suppresses his domestic opposition—from both political groups and independent media—because he has failed to deliver a solid standard of living for ordinary Russians. Russia has a lower GDP than Italy, and its average wages are lower than in Romania. As the Russian economic situation worsens, there are fears among the kleptocratic elite that citizens will begin to be dissatisfied by the regime.
Both of these viewpoints seem to have some validity, so maybe both are true to some degree. Maybe Ukraine does want to join Europe/NATO, and maybe that will destabilize Russia. There are no easy answers to all of this.
One thing is clear: Russia blames the US for propaganda, while the US blames Russia for propaganda. Would it be bad to assume both use a fair amount, and that often-times it it not govt. sponsored either?
Fear
The only factor I can agree on is mutual fear of the other. It is clear that both sides fear the other, but why? They blame us, we claim they rig our elections with no solid evidence (although I would think it odd if foreign countries, and random citizens thereof, did not often try to get votes for their favorite American president.)
Even more bizarre I find is the idea that any connection to Russia is terrible and anyone so doing, regardless of the circumstance, is equivalent to being a traitor. Apparently, I am not the only one that thinks we should spend more time talking with Russia, and that maybe reducing NATO sprawl a bit is also not a bad idea.
After digging for quite a while, I found what seems to be the primary fear held by Vlad, and it’s interesting for a few reasons.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/10/20/amid-tension-moscow-deploys-naval-fleets-conducts-missile-drills-near-border.html
2, These mass evacuations and practice drills have been going on since 2012. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-nuclear-weapon-training-attack-radiation-moscow-vladimir-putin-a7345461.html
3. Russia flying home all officials for “school” but in the middle of the semester? Odd. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3833941/Russia-orders-officials-fly-home-relatives-living-abroad-tensions-mount-prospect-global-war.html
4. Lots of emergency drills for 40-60m people since 2012, straight from Emercom’s website.
5. Ecuador cuts off internet access for wikileaks and wikileaks responds. Lets not forget that Facebook “accidentally” blacklisted wikileaks website as well (seems a bit unlikely), as well as many conservative news channels. Again, cant tell the truth on these, but they are starting to add up, esp when I consider WikiLeaks to be most likely telling the truth considering their history. Even this possible ron paul manipulation by the media presents some interesting possibilities (worth watching all the way through caucus stuff)
6. USA declares cyber war on russia? Some doubted this piece due to lack of sources, but the main author of the story is a probably the most qualified journalist in intelligence and war though.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/cia-prepping-possible-cyber-strike-against-russia-n666636
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-14/obama-administration-threatens-cyber-war-russia-save-hillary-campaign
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/10/27/the-u-s-cyber-war-with-russia-will-wait-for-president-hillary-clinton.html
6. I think Syria may be the last of the proxy wars, since there are few proxies left. Just stumbled across this a minute ago that shows we are indeed close:
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/02/syria-russian-pm-warns-world-war-troops-160212074839609.html
7. Then you stuff like this and are no longer sure what to believe:
8. And… my favorite little blurb which popped on the Yahoo homepage the other day, showing their newfound confidence:
“This year, on Sailors Square in the town of Yevpatoria, Crimea—which Russia snatched from Ukraine more than two years ago—a small but sturdy red-bricked monument with a message to future generations of Russians was built. The monument is named “For the Edification of Posterity” and the inscription on it reads: “WE HAVE RETURNED CRIMEA, YOU ARE TO RETURN ALASKA.” Silhouettes of both Crimea and Alaska are engraved.”
Tensions:
Just google any of the following to see the out of control arguments between usa and russia
•russia nato violations
•russia “nuclear war”
•etc….
My current hypothesis, subject to change, is that if Clinton gets into office, she will pursue the war path that the USA has been headed down for years, and I get the feeling that is large in part why Russia really wants Trump to win–to avoid this. But Trump is not much better at carefully thinking out things ahead of time (at least in speech).
“Democrats, this is why you need to fear Hillary Clinton: The NY Times is absolutely right — she’s a bigger hawk than the Republicans”
Update: 9-12-17: Found a clip from Putin showing that Hilary Clinton has an aggressive stance toward Russia, and Trump wants to cooperate, yet, Trump is portrayed as villain by media.
How Would a War Start Then, and What Would Be the Outcome?
History has shown that major wars like WW2, and the Vietnam escalated over incidents that were largely unclear. If a war does start, you can be sure that no one will accept responsibility for it. Maybe even a false flag or two.
Even the recent bombing in Syria over chemical attacks, numerous claims about presidential candidates, etc… show that the truth is rarely clear. Syria clearly shows this: attack first, ask questions later. What is also interesting is that many countries will always disagree with the investigations by other countries, because again, there always exists the incentive to lie to protect one’s national/self-interests. Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq? I’m still not sure on that one either.
War Between the US/NATO and Russia
It would be suicide for Russia to engage. While they do dream of asymmetric warfare methods, the reality is, it is war, it is untested, and it is very risky to assume you could win if you were outnumbered 10 to 1.
The Russian military is generally, much smaller than America’s, and that does not even include NATO. From manpower (1/1 of America’s) to aircraft carriers (1 vs 20). Tanks however, they have 4x ours, but as for navies, they appear somewhat comparable, when looking at raw unit numbers, which says nothing about their abilities. Perhaps the simplest way to look at is is that we spend more than 10x what Russia does on military, so Russia knows that in this case of asymmetric warfare, it will simply need to be a lot smarter or faster than the U.S. if it expects to win a fight looks improbably difficult.
The area where Russia may excel most is in its nuclear with hypersonic delivery methods. Basically, they could wipe out numerous cities before we knew what happened.
Of course it’s not about money either. Just look at the largest military vs the Middle Eastern cave-dwellers, which goes to show homeland territory is probably a bigger factor. Others think they are far better able to win, because we all know, the last thing you should ever do is get involved in a land war with Asia, but ultimately, the question is if conflict does break out, will there be escalation.
Perhaps the most important thing that this causes me to think is that if would be suicide for Russia to attack the US first, so their claims of being “defensive” as Putin posits regularly, does not sound unreasonable after all. But if they are defensive, it is regarding trying to take over local countries, not trying to take over the world.
USA and Russia will be equally unpredictable in the next few months/years. If it picks up momentum, it will likely suck in the rest of the world too. Perhaps like we saw in WWI, where it ends up in a free-for-all, looting situation; every country fighting for some cause of its own. You know, last year I warned to keep an eye on China and the south seas. Just recently, they rejected the Hague tribunals (international court) over their territorial dispute. China is overconfident as well as financially broke. Then you even have the fight over Gibalter since the Brexit. Poland is demanding a trillion dollars from Germany for WW2 reparations. I’m sure there are many more vyings out there.
Let’s not forget the highly contagious financial mess Greece, Italy, and other Western countries are in. It’s all one fragile mess at the moment.
Power, money. Same ol’ stories.