The recent weeks, marked by some weakening of the COVID-19 pandemic, in most countries, however, carry very alarming trends. It seems that slowly getting out of the coronavirus nightmare into which he was immersed since the beginning of this year, the world is also taking quite distinct steps towards a sharp escalation of military tension.
Iran is strengthening its defense, the DPRK declares "strengthening nuclear deterrence", and China, accusing Washington of starting a new "cold war", is in full swing preparing for an armed confrontation with the United States. However, the country for which the danger of being drawn into an armed conflict at the present stage is growing especially strong is Russia. What is the basis of such a conclusion, and with whom exactly can a military clash with us occur in the near future? Let's try to figure it out.
I will make a reservation right away (so as not to be immediately recorded as fantastical alarmists or panic dreamers) - we are not talking about unleashing the Third World War, the occupation of Russia, its dismemberment and division into “spheres of influence”. So far ... Today, the agenda is the fulfillment of the task of drawing our country into a local armed conflict, during which it may suffer a rather painful (first of all, from the image point of view) defeat, after which the West will be able to dictate its conditions to Moscow literally on all issues - from foreign to purely domestic, as was already the case in the 90s of the last century. No more - but no less. The question is how and where exactly such a scenario is planned to be implemented.
“Send weak Russia to oblivion ...”
I do not intend to analyze in detail all aspects of the causes and consequences of the withdrawal of the United States from the Open Skies Treaty - quite a number of publications are already devoted to this topic now. In the context of the issue we are discussing, it is worth dwelling on two key points. Firstly, the breakdown of this agreement is an absolutely unambiguous indication of the beginning of the state's accelerated preparations for war. There is no other explanation here and can not be by definition, because the "open sky" serves just to control the build-up of arms and the number of armed forces as a probable enemy, and the observations conducted within its framework will inevitably show high-level military preparations. This becomes especially obvious when you consider that the desire to get out of the “watchful eye” of Russia was announced in Washington almost simultaneously with the start of discussions there on the topic of returning to nuclear testing — moreover, precisely on its own territory, by Donald Trump’s talk of creating "Unprecedented super-duper missiles" and the like. The relationship is more than obvious and needs no comment. The second point is those humiliating ultimatum requirements to which the US and NATO “tie” the possibility of the renewal of the treaty.
The conditions put forward by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in the form of lifting restrictions on “inspection” flights over Kaliningrad and “on the border with Georgia” seem only at first glance technical details. In fact, the United States is thus making claims that Moscow would recognize Abkhazia and North Ossetia not as independent states, albeit in the status of "self-proclaimed", but "part of the territory of Georgia." In any case, this is precisely what Mike Pompeo follows from the statement made on the US withdrawal from the agreement. By the way, in the same context, the head of the State Department did not forget about Crimea, once again calling it "Ukrainian territory annexed by Russia." Well, as for Kaliningrad, in the opinion of high-ranking White House officials, this is nothing less than a "dagger" that ruthless Russian barbarians drove "into the heart of Europe", thereby placing a terrible threat to its security. Everything has been going on for a long time to put forward demands for the demilitarization of this region (and in fact - the destruction of our country's most important defensive "bastion" in the Western direction). So they "sailed", as they say. Give up their positions in the Caucasus, abandon the Crimea ... Why not give Kaliningrad, say, to the Poles ?! Against the background of the rest of Washington's crazy "wants" and this one will look quite organic.
American officials justify such "breadth of scope" by the fact that, in fact, there is nothing to reckon with Russia. The mood in Washington, judging by some of the statements there politicians and publications in the media, the most "hap-handed" reigns. The same Robert O'Brien, who gives advice to Donald Trump in the field of national security and loves to talk about the "daggers" stuck by someone somewhere, not so long ago said the following: "We (he and the President of the United States, obviously - ed. ) we know how to defeat and send the enemy into oblivion! ”, having in mind Russia and China. The publication of the Washington Post that the coronavirus showed the whole world "the weakness of not only Putin, but of the whole of Russia" can be considered the standard of propaganda of the most bad sense: "an effective state has not been built", in the fight against a pandemic there is "chaos", the entire government is "infected ", And so on ... Goebbels bursts with envy into small splashes. Perhaps the most striking example of American self-confidence can be considered the statements of the member of the US Congress Adam Kinzinger, who said that "Russia is much weaker than America" and can only "copy it in single actions." Consequently, “there is no need to be afraid of such a weak country”. After that, Mr. Kinziger proposed ... to immediately admit Georgia to NATO! Here it is - the key to understanding what exactly Washington is going to do.
With whose hands?
As for Georgia in NATO - this is Mr. Congressman, of course, enough. However, the Alliance already has enough people who can be set against Russia. If Poland normally (and almost with enthusiasm) accepted the call of the US representing Georgette Mosbacher to place American nuclear weapons on its territory, then this says a lot. And, by the way, it perfectly coincides with the statements made from time to time (for example, by a certain professor Tomas Panfil) that “Russia owns Kaliningrad illegally”. At the official level, such statements have not yet been made - but so far. The United States has recently literally pumped up “Poland standing on the eastern flank of NATO” with the most modern weapons. Okay, 80 ATGMs FGM-148 Javelin, the sale of which was approved by Warsaw in March of this year, or the same Patriot air defense systems can still be categorized as “defensive weapons”. However, the F-35 multipurpose fighter jets, Black Hawk helicopters, HIMARS MLRS, which Poland buys from the overseas allies in quantities completely abnormal for its size - this all does not look like a “defense”. The country is rapidly turning into a "battering ram", which the North Atlantic Alliance is targeting Russia, primarily Kaliningrad. Say, such assumptions are crazy? Well, refresh the history of the Polish-Russian wars - perhaps your opinion will change.
Another country with which Russia is already on the brink of war is Turkey. Again, by the way, which is a full member of NATO. As a matter of fact, a military confrontation between our states is already underway, and at two different theaters - in Syria and Libya, where Moscow and Ankara were on completely different sides of the "barricades". The Idlib clash almost turned into full-fledged military operations involving their armies. However, there is nothing finished. In Libya, the situation is somewhat different, while everyone understands whose interests are tied there by a “dead knot”, which is much easier to cut than untie. And this is by no means the whole list of, to put it mildly, extremely unfriendly Russia actions undertaken by the Turkish side. Ankara’s position in Crimea, its ever-increasing military-technical cooperation with Ukraine are very eloquent examples, aren't they? Moreover, one should not discount the potential likelihood of Turkish intervention in the Caucasus - in the same conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Not so long ago, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu once again announced his intention to “fully support Baku in every way possible. According to many experts, sooner or later this support may reach direct military intervention directed against Armenia, and, ultimately, Russia. By the way, against this background, Ankara’s refusal of Russian gas, whose purchases have recently decreased by 70%, and a statement about the reluctance to see tourists from our country look very alarming. This, too, can be regarded as a prelude to the conflict.
At the same time, Ukraine is again becoming the most disturbing area today. Rather, the situation in the Donbass. The conflict there began a rapid movement from a sluggish confrontation to a full-scale war. Let me remind you - literally last week, both the head of the DPR Denis Pushilin and the head of the LPR, Leonid Pasechnik, announced that the Republican armed forces were on high alert. At the same time, quite specific claims were voiced to Kiev regarding the sharply intensified shelling, starting from May 1, including with the use of MLRS. Moreover, subsequently, the defenders of Donbass for the first time in a long time began to adequately respond to the provocative actions of the Armed Forces, that is, to strike back. In fact, after this, the ceasefire can be talked about purely nominally, in fact, military operations, at least in the form of artillery duels, are again entering the active phase. There is a feeling that Kiev is deliberately aggravating the situation, inspired by its American curators, stubbornly pushing it into a big war. An example of such a “farewell” is the statement by the head of the US mission to the OSCE, James Gilmore, during an online meeting of the OSCE Permanent Council on May 21. Once again, the overseas emissary laid all the "blame for what is happening in the Donbass" exclusively on Russia, while repeating the insinuations about its "direct participation" in the Ukrainian civil war. And at the same time he demanded the return of “full control over the Crimea” to Kiev ... If Washington gives the command to fully attack the APU under its control, there is no doubt that the offensive will begin. And then what should Russia do?
A clear awareness of an indisputable fact pushes the United States and its allies to just such a course of action: Russia emerges from the coronavirus pandemic with much better results than many Western countries. Based on this, it becomes quite clear that to continue imposed on our country in 2014 economic "Survival war" is pointless and useless. The last hope for the "collapse" and "collapse" of Russia was assigned to COVID-19 and a sharp decline in energy prices, but they did not materialize. Yes, there is a drop in GDP, other problems (common, however, for the whole world). But there is no “collapse” (at least 40 million unemployed, as in the USA), the safety margin of Russia has exceeded all the expectations and forecasts of its “friends”. Continuing fussing with sanctions is simply stupid. At the same time, an extremely unpleasant prospect for the United States in the conditions of the extremely tough confrontation with China that they started is the alliance of Beijing and Moscow, even if it is situational. Recklessly seeing in our country the weaker and more vulnerable “link” of such a community, the “collective West” is likely to try to strike a blow at us, in order to neutralize it first, and then how it will turn out.
Well, and the last: as history shows, the leading Western powers showed the greatest tendency to wars in the periods of economic crises that covered the world, looking for a solution to their own problems. Today, the situation is closer than ever to development precisely in this scenario.