So ... Russia and Nato at war? Should we be worried?

by Simon 68 Replies latest social current

  • LoveUniHateExams

    The Herr Trump was a play on the brown-coat like treatment of protesters and his xenophobic fascist opinions of minorities but also his "hair" (herr ... get it?)

    Also, a bit off-topic, Donald Trump is actually of German descent - his ancestors came to America with the surname Drumpf. This was then anglicised to Trump.

  • kaik

    Russia will not start war with NATO. Russia is much weaker than was USSR. 30 Years ago USSR was vast empire with alliance from Central Europe to China, and many 3rd world countries sympathetic to communist ideas. However, it does not mean than Russia bear is powerless. Putin will balance between idea of great Russia, respected power, and his own ability to sell the war to the nation. Not everyone in Russia is eager for war in distant Syria. However, Russia since the time of Tsars was great strategist by pitting various power houses and alliances against each other. The Great Game in Central Asia with UK is an excellent example.

    During the war in Donbas last year, there were several good observations on Putin strategy:

    1. Divide NATO among each other (Poland and Baltic states vs Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary and Slovakia).
    2. Break USA hold upon NATO by supporting politicians sympathetic to Russia (Schroeder is considered German protege of Putin). Today it is closer cooperation with France. France and Russia had deep relationship and after 1917 Paris became destination for Russian emigres.
    3. Weaken democratic principles in the Western countries by supporting parties that are nationalists, anti-american, and ride on widespread dissatisfaction with establishment. In France it is Le Pen, in the Eastern Europe it is support of transformed communist parties. Russia is also influencing parties in Sweden and Finland which are critical of these two countries to ally with NATO.

    One major issue Russia faces at this moment is recession. It is going on for a while and there is a little signs that it will get better. Some estimates put cumulative losses of Russian GDP to be 15% by 2017 which will be one of the deepest recession in Russia since 1992. There are no indication that oil prices will rise, so entire economic performance during Putin reign will be whipped out by crisis and inflation.

    When it comes to Syria, I had mentioned that Russian involvement will change very little with bombing campaign without ground deployment. Asad will never recover to control entire Syria. His troops barely hold 20% of the territory. Additionally, Russia, France, USA are fighting ideology, not specific state entity, so any victory is very illusive for anyone.

  • Simon

    Russia supplies a lot of European countries natural gas.

    They could easily create a literal "cold war" without having to take military action.

  • Finkelstein

    I think Putin is helping Asad more for economic reasons to create an improved association with Russia over the long run. As well to enhance his perception on the world stage of politics which he has been taking a licking recently. I'll knock out that ISIL organization in spite of Asad being a ruthless dictator similar to himself.

    Putin is a strong armed dictator hiding behind a pretentious curtain of democracy.

    He has notably killed off many of his political opponents in recent years or looked the other way blindly by the actions of people closely inside of his own political circle, in support of that assertion.

  • SecretSlaveClass


    Excellent points.

    Turkey is playimg a dangerous game. They intend to pursue their own interests in Syria While betting that Russia will back down because of Turkey's NATO membership. Once again Putin's determination to make a play at Russia being a global power again is being underestimated. Russia may not have the claws it did during the Cold War, but it still has enough teeth to demand global respect and Putin knows it. Turkey is being reckless and a dangerous liability to NATO. They have ultimately played right into Putin's hand and given Putin a justifiable (in his view with consent of the Syrian government) foothold on Syrian airspace. I can gurantee you ISIS are very pleased with this development.

  • prologos
    Russia might be in recession, but seems to have an effective military, and like Nazi Germany could prevail in any Blitz type local conflict, I would be a refugee from that situation too. The turkish story of the radar recorded flight-path, their order to turn away turn south seems credible, the missile was fired at a target that was intruding, took it's effect over different territory. shooting at soldiers coming down in parachutes? sad, but making sure they don't do it again. Heard US veterans brag about it.
  • kaik

    Prologos, but this is not war on Russian territory and mean little to average population, because Syria is distant country. While Russia seek out revenge for terrorist bombing of its airplane in Sinai, it has not much to gain to occupy Syria. USA did not gain much with occupation of Iraq, and it was very costly military adventure. The war in Ukraine is far more strategic risk for Russia and much more close. It is in their backyard in territory which Russia consider a birthplace of its nation.

    Recession in Russia is a big deal because it will undermine Putin legacy. One has to look what ideology Eastern European have after the fall of communism. I can tell you the primary ideology there from Czech Republic to Russia is to hoard as much of material possession because entire generations were deprived of consumer goods. This region is not Western Europe where Green party ideology and environmentalist movement brainwashed many under 40 that it is nice to be poor/materially challenged, have bicycle instead of car, and live in closet size apartment as it is necessary for the environment. If Russia for prolonged period of time cannot experience steady consumer growth, the ideology of monetary self-gratification will suffer. Cumulative years of negative economic performance will wear down the society. Furthermore, recession had already undermined modernization of Russian armed forces. During the Great Recession in USA, military spending suffered as well. So waging a war in the middle of economic crisis can only impoverish population further.

  • prologos
    Kalk, I appreciate your insights, I have personally experienced the single mindedness of Soviet army adventures. will concerns about the population really count? and if they loose Europe as a gazprom customer because a pipeline going into Europe from the south, coming from the Gulf states? through Syria perhaps?The bear is going into hibernation and will be hungry and ruthless when he come out.
  • TheWonderofYou

    After Putins accusation that Turkish President might have bought dirty oil, this

    Al Jazeera report about the syrian's oil might be interesting.

    Somewhere the oil must go over the traders if not to turkey, damaskus, rebells in the land perhaps to israel, america or russia, libanon? One thing is sure, they would not pour it out unto desert sand or burn it off, thats for sure. Some have a profit, perhaps the false. Some guys earn monthly salary for the livelihood with that dirty oil. Somebody trades with the oil. If the Daesh regime has become rich with oil trade someone has bought the oil and has had profit, someone is interested that the trade is not interrupted.

    Rumours say the son of turkish president (he always gets passed the buck) benefits from oil trade in syria and that rumor is of course not affirmed, and that even worse he had given order to shoot down the jet, absurd, as if he "was" daesh oil minister and of course this is not attestable. If such infam accusations would be ever true the president would resign and talk with his son to stop that dirty game, but anyway he would not be the only trader who gets rich with oil, there are thousand others who take the oil and like it although it is dirty. Oil has no bow tie.

Share this