Here
is a translation of an article, in Russian:
Stratfor founder: ‘US fears a resurgent Russia’
STRATFOR: UKRAINE COUP PLOTTED BY US OVER RUSSIAN STANCE ON SYRIA
Stratfor
founder: ‘US fears a resurgent Russia’
«Интересы
РФ и США в отношении Украины несовместимы
друг с другом»
26
November, 2014
In
Moscow, has visited the famous American political scientist George
Friedman. Led them to a private intelligence agency Stratfor
analytical in the United States is often called a "shadow CIA".
In an interview with "Kommersant", he told about what the
United States pursues goals in Ukraine, and explained why these goals
are incompatible with the interests of Russia.
-
In its analytical work you're talking about the fragmentation of
Europe. What is it manifested?
-
During the Cold War borders within Europe have been preserved. It was
understood that, if you start to change them, it will lead to
destabilization. Once the Cold War ended, began redrawing borders of
Yugoslavia. Later, in fact, changed the borders in the Caucasus. More
recently, 45% of Scots voted for independence. To seek independence
Catalans.
Against
this background, I do not think Ukrainian situation (when one part of
the country tends to converge with the EU, while the other tends to
Russia) something completely unique. Ukrainian situation fits into
the centrifugal tendencies that we have been seeing in Europe.
Indeed, until recently, no one thought that the British-Scottish
question, like settled 300 years ago, there again acutely. In other
words: Ukrainian crisis is connected with Russia, but not only. He is
also associated with the processes in Europe, the crisis of Europe
itself.
-
European politicians say that it is the actions of Russia in the
Ukrainian direction destabilize Europe.
-
Europeans are very proud of the fact that they call their
"exceptional": that they got rid of wars and more than half
a century live in a world of stability and prosperity. But until the
early 1990s Europe, in fact, was occupied by the Soviet Union and the
United States. And then there was Yugoslavia, then the Caucasus. The
European continent has never been a truly peaceful.
-
But US officials, as well as management of EU member states, to
explain a strict policy of the Russian Federation that, annexing the
Crimea, Russia for the first time since the Second World "redrew
the borders by force."
-
Americans know that this is nonsense. The first example of changing
the borders by force was Yugoslavia. And Kosovo was only the
culmination of this process. And the United States is directly
involved in these events.
-
What is the goal of US policy in the Ukrainian direction?
-
We Americans are the last 100 years has been very consistent foreign
policy. Its main goal: to not give any Power to amass too much power
in Europe. First, the United States sought to prevent Germany to
dominate Europe, then let strengthen the influence of the USSR.
The
essence of this policy is as follows: as long as possible to maintain
the balance of power in Europe, helping the weaker party, and if the
balance is about to be significantly disrupted - to intervene at the
last moment. So the United States intervened in the First World War
after the abdication of Nicholas II in 1917, to prevent the efforts
of Germany. And during WWII US opened a second front only very late
(in June 1944), after it became clear that the Russian prevail over
the Germans.
The
United States is considered the most dangerous potential alliance
between Russia and Germany. This would be an alliance of German
technology and capital with Russian natural and human resources.
-
And now the United States who, in your opinion, holding back?
-
Now they are doing the blocking of a number of potential regional
hegemons - Serbia, Iran, Iraq. In this case, the US authorities have
resorted to diversionary attacks. For example, in the battle, when
the enemy is about to win you, you can hit him in the side, to bring
out of balance. US does not seek to "win" Serbia, Iran or
Iraq, but they need to create havoc there, to prevent the too harden.
-
And with regard to Russia what tactics they use?
-
The fragmentation of Europe accompanied by a weakening of NATO. In
European countries, in fact, armies do not. The United States under
the North Atlantic Alliance is the only strong in military terms the
country. The weakening of Europe relative power of Russia has grown
significantly.
Russian
strategic imperative - to have as deep a buffer zone on its western
borders. Therefore, Russia is always especially applies to Belarus,
Ukraine, the Baltic States and other countries in Eastern Europe.
They are of great importance for Russia's national security.
At
the beginning of this year in Ukraine was slightly pro-Russian, but
very shaky government. It suited Moscow: Russia do not want to
completely control the Ukraine or occupy it - enough that Ukraine
will not join NATO and the EU. The Russian authorities can not
tolerate a situation in which western armed forces will be a hundred
kilometers from Kursk or Voronezh.
United
States were interested in forming a pro-Western government in
Ukraine. They saw that Russia is on the rise, and tried not to let it
consolidate its position in the post-Soviet space. The success of the
pro-Western forces in Ukraine would allow to contain Russia.
Russia
calls the events of the beginning of the year organized by the US
coup. And it really was the most blatant coup in history.
-
You mean the termination of the agreement of February 21, or the
entire Maidan?
-
All together. Openly supported the US after human rights groups in
Ukraine, including money. A Russian special services, these trends
have missed. They did not understand what was happening, but when
they realized they could not take action to stabilize the situation,
and then misjudged the mood in the East of Ukraine.
-
That is the Ukrainian crisis - is the result of confrontation between
Russia and the United States?
-
Here you have two of the country. One wants Ukraine was neutral. And
the other - to Ukraine was part of a line of containment of Russian
expansion. We can not say that one party is mistaken: both are based
on their national interests. Just these interests can not be compared
with each other.
Americans,
as I have said, it is important to prevent the emergence of hegemony
in Europe. But recently they have started to seriously worry about
the potential of Russia and its intentions. Russia is beginning to
move from the defense position that she has held since 1992, to the
restoration of its sphere of influence. The matter is a fundamental
mismatch of national interests of the two great powers.
-
That the actions of the Russian Federation could alert the US?
-
Russia has begun to take certain steps that the United States
considered unacceptable. Primarily in Syria. There are Russian
Americans have demonstrated that they are able to influence the
process in the Middle East. And the US and Russian without enough
problems in this region.
Russian
intervene in the process in the Middle East including, as they had
hoped to get a tool to influence US policy in other areas. But they
miscalculated. United States thought it was Russia's attempt to harm
them. It is in this context it is worth to consider the events in
Ukraine. Russian, apparently, simply have not calculated how
seriously the US perceive their actions or that they can easily find
countermeasures. US same in this situation looked at Russia and
thought what she wants less - instability in Ukraine.
-
Do you think Ukraine in retaliation for Syria?
-
No, not a place. But Russian intervene in the process in Syria, while
the United States addressed the problems in Iraq, have been
negotiating with Iran ... In Washington, many people have the
impression that Russian want to destabilize the already fragile US
position in the Middle East - a region that is key importance for
America.
In
Washington, on this account were two points of view: that the Russian
just playing the fool, or that they have found a weak point of the US
and trying to take advantage of it. I'm not saying that Russia's
intervention in the Syrian conflict was the cause of the Ukrainian
crisis, it would be a stretch. But this intervention has led to what
many in Washington have decided that Russian - this is a problem. And
that in such a case? Not to join with them in the same confrontation
in the Middle East. It is better to divert their attention to other
problems in other regions.
Now
I'm all a bit oversimplified, it is clear that all the more difficult
in practice, but a causal relationship was. As a result, the bottom
line is that the strategic interests of the United States - to
prevent Russia from becoming a hegemon. And in the strategic
interests of Russia - not to allow the US to its borders.
-
What, in your opinion, the meaning of US sanctions? Russian
authorities say that the US wants to bring about regime change.
-
The purpose of sanctions is to with minimal damage to the US and
several large EU hurt Russia in order capitulated to US demands.
Sanctions
demonstrate the power of the United States. And the United States
willing to use that power to countries with nothing on it to respond
adequately. It is also an opportunity to "build" the
Europeans. I do not think that the main purpose of the United States
is regime change in Russia. The main goal was to limit the room for
maneuver of the Russian authorities that we are witnessing. But it
played a role, other factors such as the decline in the Russian
economy, falling oil prices.
-
In Russia, many say that oil prices dropped due to the US conspiracy
with the Gulf countries.
-
Trouble is always easier to explain someone's deliberate actions. But
a number of countries, including China, India and Brazil, have
reduced forecasts for the rate of growth of their economies. Europe
has generally zero growth. In this case, the oil is now a revolution,
the amount of available oil grow.
The
fall in oil prices was inevitable. What else did you expect? But you
have built its economic strategy, focusing not only on high oil
prices, but in general on energy exports. It made you vulnerable! We
had to use the last 10-15 years, high income from selling energy
resources to diversify the economy, but your government did not.
-
Can we expect to improve US-Russian relations after the next
presidential election in the US?
-
In Russia, too personify American politics. In the US President -
this is only one of the institutions of power, it is not is
sovereign. Obama also bound hand and foot, as its predecessors. If
the Middle East are gaining momentum rapidly categories such as
"Islamic state", it does not matter whether the US
President Democrat or Republican - he will have to hit them blow.
And
no American president can not afford to sit idly by if Russia becomes
more and more influential. Russia's actions in the Middle East, for
example, in the case of asylum Edward Snowden were perceived in the
US as against US interests. Any US president would have to react to
it. I have about three years ago in one of his books predicted that
as soon as Russia starts to gain momentum and demonstrate it, there
was a crisis in Ukraine. It was obvious.
-
How realistic do you think Russia's rapprochement with China?
-
China has now itself a lot of problems - declining growth, high
inflation and unemployment. Do not expect gifts from Beijing. A tube
construction in China, to which the Russian authorities will have to
spend significant amounts is unlikely to have anything like a
tangible effect on the Russian economy.
-
How do you see the further developments around Ukraine?
-
Russia will not make concessions in the Crimea, is obvious. But I
believe that it could face serious problems with the supply of the
peninsula. Yet Moscow can not retreat from some of its requirements
with regard to Ukraine. It can not be allowed to appear in Ukraine
Western military. This is a nightmare in Moscow, and this limits its
room for maneuver.
The
US will need to make a strategic decision, not now but in the future,
either to intervene more actively in events in Ukraine, which is
fraught with difficulties, or to build a new alliance - within NATO
or non-NATO - with the participation of Poland, Romania, the Baltic
States, for example, Turkey. This is already happening, slowly but
occurs. And it will be something that Russia does not accept the
"cordon sanitaire". The US is not that you need to have
control over Ukraine, it is important that it is not controlled by
Russia.
Much
will depend on Kiev. Kiev authorities - the weak point of Ukraine. If
it will break - which is now surprisingly not observed, Russia will
try to wrap this up in their favor.
But
the main question - whether Russia itself resist. It is now faced
with many factors that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union: it is
- the lack of effective transport system; it is - a skeptical
attitude towards the capital in many regions of the Caucasus to the
Far East; but the main thing - it's the economy that functions only
under certain circumstances - namely, high energy prices. Do you have
only one product, and it is now the global market in excess of.
And here is what I would say is a fairly objective assessment of the Russian economy
And
here is an article from 2004, before the Guardian became a propaganda voice
for the Empire
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.