Dmitry Trenin
RT.com

The conflict between Russia and the West won’t end after Kyiv is no longer viable as a proxy

The “Ukraine crisis” is not actually an accurate name for what is happening now in relations between Russia and the West. This confrontation is global. It touches virtually every functional area – from finance to pharmaceuticals to sport – and spans many geographical regions.

In Europe, which has become the epicenter of this confrontation, the highest level of tension outside Ukraine is now in the Baltic region. The question often asked in Russia (and in the West) is: Will this become the next theater of war?

In Western Europe and North America, a scenario has long been contemplated in which the Russian Army, after its victory in Ukraine, continues to march forward – next seeking to conquer the Baltic republics and Poland.

The purpose of this simple propaganda fantasy is clear: to convince Western Europeans that if they do not “invest fully” in supporting Kyiv, they may end up with a war on their own territory.

It is telling that almost no one in the EU dares to publicly ask whether Moscow is interested in a direct armed conflict with NATO. What would its aims be in such a war? And what price would it be willing to pay? Obviously, even posing such questions could lead to accusations of spreading Russian propaganda.

Our country takes note of provocative statements made by our northwestern neighbors, the Poles, the Baltic states, and the Finns. They have referred to the possibility of blockading the Kaliningrad exclave by sea and land, and closing Russia’s exit from the Gulf of Finland. Such statements are mostly made by retired politicians, but sometimes sitting ministers and military officers also raise their voices.

More »

Dmitry Trenin
RT.com

There are too many people who think the Kremlin is bluffing and they can behave with impunity towards Russia

There are too many people who think the Kremlin is bluffing and they can behave with impunity towards Russia

Vladimir Putin’s decision to update Moscow’s nuclear doctrine isn’t a knee-jerk reaction to current events. Unlike, for example, the threat to attack deeper inside Russia with long-range missiles. The changes were flagged by the Russian president several months ago, and from yesterday’s speech we learned that the Strategic Deterrence Commission meets twice a year, which means that the document itself is constantly being re-read and re-thought.

The merits of strengthening nuclear deterrence became clear more than two years ago, when the US declared that its goal – in the Ukraine conflict – is to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia. The West then began its game of escalation. Moscow’s old nuclear doctrine was aimed at other wars and scenarios and proved ineffective at deterring the enemy in the new circumstances.

We will now see the reaction in the West, where unfortunately there are many people in high places who have convinced themselves that Putin is ‘bluffing’, that Russia is ‘afraid to respond’, and that it is therefore possible to behave with impunity toward it. The doctrinal correction is thus essentially a signal to the sober minds that remain in the halls of power in Washington: this is the last warning.

More »

Dmitry Trenin
RT.com

The US-led bloc has pushed the country to develop a new awareness of itself and its place in the world

When President Vladimir Putin, back in February 2022, launched Russia’s military operation in Ukraine, he had specific, but limited objectives in mind. It was essentially about assuring Russia’s security vis-à-vis NATO.

However, the drastic, expansive and well-coordinated Western reaction to Moscow’s moves – the torpedoing of the Russo-Ukrainian peace deal and the mounting escalation of the US-led bloc's involvement in the conflict, including its role in deadly attacks inside Russia – have fundamentally changed our country's attitude towards our former partners.

We no longer hear talk about “grievances” and complaints about “failures in understanding.” The last two years have produced nothing less than a revolution in Moscow’s foreign policy, more radical and far-reaching than anything anticipated on the eve of the Ukraine intervention. Over the past 25 months, it has been quickly gaining in strength and profundity. Russia's international role, its position in the world, its goals and methods of reaching them, its basic worldview – all are changing.

The national foreign policy concept, signed by Putin just a year ago, represents a major departure from its predecessors. It establishes the country’s identity in terms of it being a distinct civilization. In fact, it is the first official Russian document to do so. It also radically transforms the priorities of Moscow's diplomacy, with the countries of the post-Soviet ‘near abroad’ on top, followed by China and India, Asia and the Middle East, and Africa and Latin America.

Western Europe and the United States rank next to last, just above the Antarctic.

More »

Pepe Escobar

The unipolar model of the world order has failed.
~ Vladimir Putin, St Petersburg, May 22

In more ways than one, last week heralded the birth of a Eurasian century. Of course, the US$400 billion Russia-China gas deal was clinched only at the last minute in Shanghai, on Wednesday (a complement to the June 2013, 25-year, $270 billion oil deal between Rosneft and China's CNPC.)

Then, on Thursday, most of the main players were at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum - the Russian answer to Davos. And on Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin, fresh from his Shanghai triumph, addressed the participants and brought the house down.

It will take time to appraise last week's whirlwind in all its complex implications. Here are some of the St Petersburg highlights, in some detail. Were there fewer Western CEOs in town because the Obama administration pressured them - as part of the "isolate Russia" policy? Not many less; Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley may have snubbed it, but Europeans who matter came, saw, talked and pledged to keep doing business.

And most of all, Asians were ubiquitous. Consider this as yet another chapter of China's counterpunch to US President Barack Obama's Asian tour in April, which was widely described as the "China containment tour". [1]

More »