Yves here. Because I’ve been paying so much attention to the war in Iran, I’ve been able to watch what’s happening with the war in Ukraine, and the strange threats from many UK and EU leaders when they don’t have the means to do much, out of the corner of one eye. It would take at least ten years to assemble even the biggest threat to Russia (nukes), given its empty production and high energy costs and the shortage of goods related to the war in Iran is a major industrialization storm. In addition, as Stanislav Krapivnik has explained in a long way, the so-called European weapons depend on the important supplies provided by the US. Krapivnik estimated that it will take at least ten years, and more than two, for the EU to design and build truly indigenous weapons systems.
Oh, and how will China cooperate in providing the necessary sheets and materials if the EU gets even worse vis-a-vis Russia?
Having said that, even a weak party in a favorable geographical position can do a lot of damage. For example, Russia is well aware that the Kalingrad enclave and the Baltic Sea fleet are in the clear.
By Andrew Korybko, an American political analyst based in Moscow who focuses on the transition of the global system to multipolarity in the New Cold War. He has a PhD from MGIMO, which is under the umbrella of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Originally published on his website
There are only three scenarios left: NATO finally agrees to some kind of Russian proposals; Russia begins a preventive war against European NATO betting that the US will not intervene directly; or Russia submits peacefully to the West.
Last weekend’s surprise phone call between President Emmanuel Macron and Alexander Lukashenko followed Russia’s Deputy Chairman of the Security Council Dmitry Medvedev warning about a 1941-like threat posed by Germany’s resurgence and the UK’s assembling an international military force to contain Russia. These three events have combined to draw attention to the way the Brits, French and Germans, Russia’s usual European rivals, are now at its door. The security implications are profound.
The Brits are staying in Estonia, where they plan to lead Russia in blocking the Arctic -Baltic front, while the Germans are opening a base in Lithuania and the French have just announced regular nuclear tests with Poland. As a reminder, Estonia straddles the “Russian mainland” while Lithuania and Poland border Kaliningrad and Belarus along its defensive lines. Therefore, the “military Schengen” between the Netherlands, Germany and Poland may soon be extended to include France and the Baltic States.
That would greatly improve the flow of troops and equipment from Western Europe to Russia’s borders, thus addressing Russian policymakers’ fears that the EU is preparing for a possible future invasion of their country. Given France’s bases in Romania and the military agreement with neighboring Moldova, which includes a critical side in the Ukrainian Conflict due to allowing France to help Odessa in the event of its threatened general intervention, they and others may join as well.
To make things even more relevant from a Russian national security perspective, Germany recently secured a deep defense co-production agreement with Ukraine, thus extending its military history deeper into what Russia considers its “sphere of influence.” The result is that the UK concentrates its influence on the Arctic-Baltic front, Germany does so in the Baltic countries (Lithuanian) and Ukraine, while France is already concentrated in Poland, Romania, and Moldova.
Germany wants to build the largest NATO army in Europe, which would need to surpass Poland and rightly in its opinion put that country down as a vassal, while France and the UK are nuclear powers. Therefore, the threat posed by their military and strategic alliances at Russia’s doorstep cannot be overestimated. At the very least, it may encourage their allies to behave violently against Russia, calculating as much as possible that the Great Power will prevent Russian retaliation.
That would be a mistake of the best proportions because Russia cannot allow such a situation to happen, let alone a “new normal”, as it would be the same as arming it to force an endless concession that would eventually culminate in Russia’s subjugation and eventually “Balkanization”. In other words, a NATO-Russian hot war is almost inevitable, although no one can say for sure whether the US will help its European allies, or to what extent if so, or whether it will hang them out to dry.
Therefore, it is more urgent than ever that the European security architecture be changed as Russia wanted to do it by means of cooperation before special operations, the failure of which is why Putin wants to advance this by military means instead. There are only three scenarios left: NATO finally agrees to some kind of Russian proposals; Russia begins a preventive war against European NATO betting that the US will not intervene directly; or Russia submits peacefully to the West.
