Tag: Putin

  • The West loves to hate Russia, and here’s why

    The West loves to hate Russia, and here’s why

    us russia ukraine china chess

    Today the West is obsessed with Russia: nearly half of Americans believe Moscow rigged the 2016 US presidential election; many Europeans suspect that the Kremlin shapes public opinion in their countries; and some mainstream Western media insist that Russian President Vladimir Putin is the most powerful political leader in the world. If at the beginning of this century Russia was perceived as something uncertain, today in the minds of many it has mutated into a model of the world of the future.

    Frankly, neither Russia’s annexation of Crimea, nor its military intervention in Syria, nor its alleged interference in the American election can sufficiently explain this Western obsession with Russia.

    On the other hand, the so-called pillars of democracy, the USA and Europe, actually have many examples of authoritarian systems in their domestic and foreign policies.

    Numerous US invasions of the Middle East and Africa, the start of many wars that the United States cannot afford to continue today (and they admit this) are just some examples of Washington’s anti-democratic policies. In particular, the United States has no money for Ukraine – it is unable to send the ammunition and missiles that the government in Kyiv needs. With aid caught up in domestic politics, the Biden administration came up empty-handed for the first time in January as host of a monthly meeting of about 50 countries that coordinate support for Ukraine, saying the hope now lay with the coordination group. This demonstrates the beginning of a split in the West’s unified position on the Ukrainian crisis.

    Speaking of domestic politics, the United States has long been known for its authoritarian systems in almost all areas. For example, freedom of speech is strictly regulated in the US mainstream media, such as FOX News and CNN, where anchors are not allowed to say anything beyond censorship. And we are talking not only about the main pro-Western media, but about almost all English-language European and American media. Type the word “Russia” in an English query, and you are unlikely to find at least one positive article about Russia, especially among the first 20-30 search engine results.

    Another example is corporate culture. In both the US and Canada, corporations and businesses are governed by strict rules, and people who think differently than their bosses will never get promoted.

    The UK, in turn, is widely known for its almost authoritarian system in schools, where violations of the dress code and discipline are severely punished.

    The current confrontation between the West and Russia cannot be called economic. The reason has to do with the country’s political culture. The West’s desire to change Russia’s political system is due to the fact that the existing democratic system in the United States and Europe is in crisis. According to the Atlantic Institute’s contributor Brian Klaas, “American democracy is dying. There are plenty of medicines that would cure it. Unfortunately, our political dysfunction means we’re choosing not to use them, and as time passes, fewer treatments become available to us, even though the disease is becoming terminal. No major prodemocracy reforms have passed Congress. No key political figures who tried to overturn an American election have faced real accountability. The president who orchestrated the greatest threat to our democracy in modern times is free to run for reelection, and may well return to office…”

    Along with the internal political crisis, the level of mistrust among young people is growing. Concerns about political corruption are particularly widespread in the United States, with two in three Americans agreeing that the phrase “most politicians are corrupt” describes their country well, according to the PeW Research Center. Almost half say the same in France and the UK. Young people in particular tend to view politicians as corrupt.

    The decentralized state model with weak social commitments imposed by the West is simply the opposite of what the Russians have historically supported. Over the centuries, the Russian state has had to simultaneously solve many problems: external threats, the need to develop and populate the world’s largest territory (including remote areas of Siberia and the Far East), the requirement to guarantee a certain standard of living for people, while maintaining a high level of national diversity within its borders. Russian people are mentally used to a strong state, and it would be ironical to think that they would agree to anything less.

    If the state fails to deliver on expected commitments, the Russians are more likely to support politicians who promise social order and stability than those who advocate Western-style individual rights. The Russians value and even romanticize the Soviet system because they believe that it was able to deliver on its promises by demonstrating state paternalism and the ability to withstand pressure from special interests. Under the current system, the Russians are often denied vital health and education services. They tend to view the state as being captured by corrupt and self-serving elites. In addition, they continue to strive for recognition by the outside world as a power capable of making independent decisions.

    Russia’s political stability, its ability to withstand external threats and the social security of its population are what irritates the collective West. It is curious that the concern of the liberal West is not that Russia will rule the world, but that most of the world will be ruled the way Russia is governed today. Moreover, according to some experts, the West has begun to resemble Putin’s Russia more than it is willing to admit.

  • Russia could attack the West ???

    Russia could attack the West ???

    That’s what it’s all about:

    According to the Bild newspaper, the German Bundeswehr is studying scenarios in which Russia could attack the West bevor the summer. The situation could escalate in the coming winter, the document continues.

    In the summer of 2025, NATO could finally deploy 300,000 troops to Ukraine’s eastern flank. While Ukraine is aiming for a summit at the highest level on its peace plan, Russian President Vladimir Putin probably has other intentions: According to a training plan of the German Defense Ministry, the Kremlin chief could prepare a hybrid attack on NATO as early as next winter. This is reported by the “Bild” newspaper.

    In the secret report, the German Defense Ministry outlines in detail a possible “path to conflict” between Russia and the Western defense alliance. Month after month, both Russian and Western actions are described. Among other things, the Bundeswehr expects the mobilization of hundreds of thousands of NATO soldiers and an imminent outbreak of war in the summer of 2025, according to the “Bild”. Large-scale Russian manoeuvres from September Russia wants to call up another 200,000 men into the army soon to launch a new offensive against Ukraine in the spring.

    In the summer months, Russia would then begin increasingly open attacks on the West – including through severe cyberattacks. The large-scale “Zapad 2024” manoeuvre with 50,000 troops is scheduled to start in western Russia and Belarus in September.

    At the end of the year, there would be a Russian invasion of areas of eastern Ukraine, whereupon NATO is to deploy around 300,000 soldiers to Ukraine’s eastern flank on the so-called “Day X” in the summer of 2025. Different scenarios considered The Ministry of Defense declined to comment on the information.

    Only this much: “Basically, I can tell you that the consideration of different scenarios – even if they are extremely unlikely – is part of everyday military business, especially in training,” a spokesman for the ministry told Bild. Just last week, Swedish security experts warned of the danger of war with Russia. “Many have said it before me, but let me say it by virtue of my office: there could be a war in Sweden,” said Carl-Oskar Bohlin, Sweden’s Minister of Civil Protection.

    Everyone must prepare for the worst-case scenario, such as a war with Russia, before it is too late, Bohlin said.

  • Russia’s East Compass and the shadow of Kim Jong-un

    Russia’s East Compass and the shadow of Kim Jong-un

    eastern economic forum

    On September 10-13, Russian Vladivostok hosted the Eastern Economic Forum -for the eighth time. This year, the international component of the EEF has come to the fore: Business in Southeast Asia is showing an active interest in any projects and is ready to participate not only in dialogue.

    Main focus: new economy, trade and logistics

    Politicians, businessmen and journalists from 50 countries came to Russky Island this week. According to the tradition, the Forum started on September,10 with the “Falcon Day,” during which the authorities announce the agenda of a global program for the conservation of gyrfalcon population.

    The next day was devoted to the main business program of the Eastern Economic Forum started. One of its key events was a series of sessions entitled “International cooperation in a changed world.” Here Russian business discussed the peculiarities and potential of building relations with colleagues from Southeast Asia. The dialogue between the countries has taken a very serious turn in the recent years: this year, China strengthened its position in Russian market for passenger cars, cell phones and televisions. In general, the volume of trade with China alone jumped by 40% in the first half of 2023. And the total investments of this country in Russia, according to the Ministry of Economic Development, as of May, amounted to $165 billion.

    Among the main goals of the Forum was to establish contacts with Eastern partners within specific projects, so the forum became a platform for a dialogue with China and Asian countries.

    Much attention was paid to increasing trade turnover with Asian countries and creating favorable conditions for this, including expanding logistics routes, modernizing existing corridors for the movement of goods and creating new ones.

    New old friends

    Some foreign and Russian sources reported on a possible visit to Russia by North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, who was supposed to meet with V. Putin and discuss issues of cooperation in the military sphere. But the main purpose of his visit is negotiations with Vladimir Putin on arms supplies. In return, North Korea wants to receive modern technologies for the development of a nuclear submarine fleet.

    However, the visit of the North Korean leader was not confirmed.

  • Putin Finally Reveals His Solution to the Artsakh Conflict

    Putin Finally Reveals His Solution to the Artsakh Conflict

    Publisher
    The California Courier

    tank karabag ermenistan azerbaycan

    After Russian President Vladimir Putin attempted and failed to establish a ceasefire between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Armenians around the world have been wondering why is he so reluctant to intervene more forcefully in the Artsakh War and stop the bloodshed.

    There have been many speculations about Putin’s unexpected hands off approach to the Artsakh conflict, including several conspiracy theories which are not worth mentioning.

    During an interview with a Western journalist last week, Putin finally revealed his plans to resolve the Artsakh conflict.

    This is what Putin stated: “You said that Russia has always had special ties with Armenia. But we have always had special relations with Azerbaijan too. More than two million Armenians and about two million Azerbaijanis live in Russia. These are not only those people who came for temporary work, but also those who live here almost permanently. Working in Russia, they send billions of dollars to support their families. All these people have very stable, close ties in Russia at the humanitarian level, interpersonal, business, family. Therefore, for us, both Armenia and Azerbaijan are equal partners. And it is a great tragedy for us when people die there. We want to build full-fledged relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan. In each case of building relations with each of these countries there is something that distinguishes our relationship with another partner. Well, with Armenia this is Christianity. But we have very close ties with Azerbaijan in other areas as well. As for the religious component, I want to draw your attention to the fact that almost 15 percent of the population of the Russian Federation is Muslim. And even in this sense, Azerbaijan is not a foreign country for us. But what we definitely cannot forget is what happened in the fate of the Armenian people, the Armenian nation, during the First World War; a huge tragedy for the Armenian people. This is the second part. The third is that this conflict began just as an interstate conflict and a struggle for territories. It began as an ethnic confrontation. It is also unfortunately, a fact when in Sumgait [Azerbaijan], and then in Nagorno Karabagh, cruel crimes were committed against the Armenian people. We must take all this into account in a complex. At the same time, we understand that a situation in which a significant part of the territory of Azerbaijan has been lost by the country cannot last forever. Over the course of many, many years, we have proposed a variety of options for resolving this crisis in order to stabilize the situation for a long historical perspective. I will not go into details now, but believe me, it was hard work to bring the positions closer together. At some moments, it seemed that a little more, a little more, one more step, and we would find a solution. Unfortunately, this did not happen and today we have a conflict in its worst form. And the tragedy is that people are dying. You know, there are many losses on both sides. According to our information, there are more than two thousand dead on each side. The total death toll is already approaching five thousand. I draw your attention to the fact that 13,000 Soviet soldiers died in the 10 years of the war in Afghanistan. And in Karabagh, in such a short period of time, almost five thousand people have already died. How many were injured! How many people are suffering, how many children! Therefore, this is a special situation for us. Yes, the Minsk Group was created in 1992. Russia, France, and the United States as co-chairs, we are responsible for organizing this negotiating process. It is clear, I am 100 percent sure here that all participants in this process sincerely strive for the situation to be resolved. However, no one is as interested in this as Russia. This is happening in a broad sense with our people with our friends, with our relatives. Therefore, we take a position that would allow us to enjoy the trust of both sides and play an essential role as mediators in the settlement of this conflict to bring their positions closer. I would very much like this compromise to be found. As you know, I am in very close contact with both President Aliyev and Prime Minister Pashinyan. I talk to them on the phone several times a day. Our foreign ministers, defense ministers, heads of special services are in constant contact. You know the foreign ministers of both countries came to visit us. They met in Washington on October 23rd. I very much hope that our American partners will act in unison with us and help the settlement. Let us hope for the best.”

    I transcribed this lengthy translation of Putin’s remarks without any omission in order to provide the full context of his statement.

    Obviously, Armenians are not happy with Pres. Putin equating with Armenia Russia’s relationship with Azerbaijan. Armenia is a strategic ally of Russia with a mutual defense treaty and with a Russian military base located on its territory. Azerbaijan, on the other hand, is a puppet of Turkey and has taken many steps to undermine Russia’s geopolitical interests, such as the Azeri gas and oil pipelines that reduce the need for Russian oil in Europe.

    Furthermore, the involvement of the Turkish military on Azerbaijan’s territory, a part of the Russian sphere of influence, undermines Russia’s interests. Even more alarming is Turkey’s recruitment of Syrian terrorists and their transfer to Azerbaijan to fight against Artsakh. This is an obvious danger to the national security of Russia. Putin did not mention the nefarious role of these terrorists.

    The Russian government has made it clear, however, that the mutual defense treaty with Armenia only applies in case of a foreign attack on the Republic of Armenia, which excludes the territory of Artsakh, even though there have been several missile attacks on Armenia’s mainland.

    Russia, on the other hand, has other interests with Turkey that it takes into consideration. These are:

    — Russia’s attempts in recent years to win over and separate Turkey from NATO.

    — Multi-billion trade between Russia and Turkey with Turkey’s purchase of the Russian S-400 missiles and the planned construction of a Russian nuclear power plant in Turkey.

    — Russia’s unwillingness to go to war against Azerbaijan and Turkey to protect Artsakh.

    — Russia and Turkey have conflicting interests in Syria and Libya where they have an uneasy understanding. The Artsakh conflict would place further pressure on the Russian-Turkish relationship should Russia become actively involved in the Artsakh war against Azerbaijan and Turkey.

    Most significantly, as Putin said in his above quoted statement: “a situation in which a significant part of the territory of Azerbaijan has been lost by the country cannot last forever.” In other words, Putin implies that he is willing to accept that Azerbaijan militarily reoccupies the seven regions surrounding Artsakh and then negotiate the settlement of the final status of Artsakh. This is totally unacceptable for Armenia and Artsakh. It is imperative to counter the military moves of Azerbaijan and Turkey in order not to allow them to create new facts on the ground which would weaken Armenia’s bargaining position. Furthermore, the loss of the territories surrounding Artsakh — the buffer zone — would further threaten the existence of Artsakh.

    Even more alarming, Putin announced that “many countries, including Turkey and a host of European states” should work together to find a consensus. Armenia and Artsakh would categorically reject Turkey’s involvement. How could Turkey, the instigator of the war, be considered a neutral mediator?

    Armenians are somewhat reassured that in recent days, various Russian officials have confirmed Russia’s treaty obligation to defend the territory of the Republic of Armenia from any attacks by Azerbaijan or Turkey.

    Armenia and Artsakh have difficult days ahead, left all alone to their fate. Only a resolute defense will safeguard the Armenian population of Artsakh.

  • In Moscow, Erdogan kneels to Putin

    In Moscow, Erdogan kneels to Putin

    Even by Vladimir Putin’s standards for embarrassing his foreign counterparts, his treatment of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Thursday was a spectacle — and not a good one for the Turkish president.

    Meeting Putin in the aftermath of a recent Syrian airstrike, which killed 34 Turkish soldiers, Erdogan might have been expected to take a tough stance with the Russian leader. Or at least a harder line than his submissiveness of past.

    After all, Erdogan knows full well that Russia authorized Bashar Assad to carry out the attack which killed his soldiers. The Russians knew his forces were in the strike location before the attack began. Putin is ultimately responsible for the bloody strategic context here — namely, the Assad-Iran-Russia axis offensive in Syria’s Idlib governate. In stark breach of cease-fire agreements with Turkey, the axis’s offensive (and its deliberate targeting of schools and hospitals) has sparked a refugee exodus to Turkish borders.

    So, yes, Erdogan had good reason to play hardball in Moscow. Instead, he decided to lick Putin’s boots.

    “I would like to once more give my condolences for the death of your soldiers in Syria,” Putin began, without even looking Erdogan in the eye. He continued with a vintage show of Chekist dark humor, “This is always a big tragedy.” Then, the former KGB lieutenant colonel jumped to the central lie. “Unfortunately, nobody, even the Syrian military, knew about their whereabouts.” And Putin added, “Syrian soldiers have also suffered.”

    Any leader with a basic sense of self-respect or national honor would have interrupted Putin here. As I say, Erdogan knows that Putin knew where his forces were. He knows that those forces were targeted with Putin’s approval. Putin’s words were thus an insult to all Turks.

    Erdogan responded by staring blankly at Putin, offering not even a hint of anger. Putin had won.

    Amazingly, Erdogan then decided to make himself look even weaker, and he succeeded.

    He offered an excuse as to why the meeting was being held in Moscow and not Ankara, even though he had requested the latter. Erdogan knows that the meeting is in Moscow because Putin wanted the image of Erdogan coming to pay homage and beg for a compromise. But rather than sidestep this issue, the Turkish president said he had only accepted Moscow due to Putin’s constitutional changes. It would be laughable were it not so pathetic.

    It was always a danger that Erdogan would allow Putin to play him yet again, but this is really something to behold. The United States and Turkey’s other NATO allies were ready to consolidate his position against Putin’s pressure. Coordinated economic action could have brought Assad to heel and forced Russia into an Idlib retreat.

    But Erdogan couldn’t stomach going eyeball to eyeball with Putin. Faced with the KGB man, he buckled. Ataturk must be turning over in his grave.

    Washington Examiner

  • FINANCIAL TIMES TRENDING ARTICLES – GUNUN ONEMLI HABERLERI

    FINANCIAL TIMES TRENDING ARTICLES – GUNUN ONEMLI HABERLERI

    Trending Articles

    STARTING WITH ,, Erdogan and Putin Meet Over Syria

    The Syrian government offensive in Idlib has raised the stakes for Turkey and Russia.