Panic about Panic
By Immanuel Wallerstein
Source: Toward Freedom
February 6, 2015
The one common assumption that transcends these differences is the fact that the occurrence of a sharp drop in world oil and gas prices combined with the embargo imposed by some countries on Russia has created an economic squeeze on Russian state expenditures and individual consumption.
In Russia today almost everyone across the political spectrum believes that the West, and the United States in particular, has conspired with some others principally Saudi Arabia and Israel to punish Russia for its actions and alleged misdeeds in pursuing what Russians regard as the legitimate defense of their national interests. The debate centers primarily on Ukraine, but includes as well to a lesser degree Syria and Iran. The conspiracy theory is probably a bit exaggerated, since the United States started developing its shale oil (a major factor in todays world oversupply) already in 1973 as a response to the OPEC price rise.
Yet, one doesnt hear much discussion of these foreign policy issues in Russia. This is probably because there is not too much dissent inside Russia concerning Russias official foreign policy positions, not even from persons or groups very critical of President Putin on other matters. What one hears discussed instead is how best to handle the acute budgetary shortfall that the Russian state is facing
Full article: https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/panic-about-panic/
leveymg
(36,418 posts)A second step has been the decision to enter into accords with China and other countries to engage in currency transactions in their own currencies, thereby avoiding the fluctuations of the dollar. One of the resulting projects would be a pipeline across Siberia to Northeast Asia, financed heavily by China. This is a way of circumventing the sanctions.
A third step has been the just announced transmission of the S-300 air defense missile system to Iran. Long promised, Russia had cancelled the arrangement in 2010 as result of pressure from the West. Russia is now going to fulfil its initial promise. This serves to reinforce Russian support for Irans inclusion in the decision-making processes of West Asia. It both puts pressure on the United States and helps to check Saudi Arabias attempt to maintain itself as the key Sunni Arab state. Already, with the accession of King Salman, the press is full of discussion about the fragility of the Saudi position.
Finally, in Ukraine, the Russians pursue a careful policy. Not totally in control of the Donetsk-Luhansk autonomists, Russia is nonetheless making sure that the autonomists cannot be eliminated militarily. The Russian price for real peace is a commitment by NATO that Ukraine is not a potential member, about which there are different views within NATO. Everyone is playing a high risk game in Ukraine. My guess, and it is in large measure a guess, is that sanity will prevail and a political deal realized. I would say, watch Angela Merkel after the German elections. She (and Germany) want a deal but are not yet free to pursue it.
Manifest Destiny
(139 posts)Ironically, she has been asked to work primarily for increased commission due to the effects of sanctions and less people traveling abroad. This makes her job now more like an American travel agent and she says it has actually increased her wages. Previously she was paid just a small commission plus a set wage that wasn't very much. She doesn't necessarily have to work as the job is just for spending money. My father in law works in the industrial sector and has a well paying job at the same rate as before sanctions.
They are adapting quite easily and say that prices have gone up for mostly European food items and for people who travel abroad, however, travel to resorts within Russia is much less expensive. Sochi and Crimea are now much more popular, therefore less money is flowing into Europe as Russians were previously one of Europes largest new market segments.
This all may bode well for Greece as she is telling me (we chat via Skype daily) that new deals are in the works and Greece is Russias third largest international tourist destination after Turkey and Egypt.
My relatives were not previously pro -Putin but now they are fully behind him and like most Russians believe that Russia is the only country that has been honest about what has happened in East Ukraine. They fully understand geo-political and they are aware of Zbigniew Brezinksis Grand Chessboard and what actually has taken place in Ukraine. Like most Russians they are not fooled.
I would say the article is incorrect in that regard as the author states that he thinks the Russians aren't much for geo-politics. I would say just the opposite.
Here's the link to the Grand Chessboard strategy from 2009 that shows that this was all in the works for a very long time.
http://www.imi-online.de/2009/01/01/imperial-geopolitics/
IMI-Analyse 2009/013, in: IMI/DFG-VK: Kein Frieden mit der NATO
Imperial Geopolitics: Ukraine, Georgia and the New Cold War between NATO and Russia
von: Martin Hantke | Veröffentlicht am: 1. Januar 2009
Drucken
Hier finden sich ähnliche Artikel
Zbigniew Brzezinskis book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives is essential reading for anyone wishing to understand current and future U.S., EU and NATO policy. Over ten years ago the former National Security Advisor gave a graphic description of the imperatives of imperial geopolitics. He argued that the U.S.A.s position of supremacy should be preserved under all circumstances. To this end NATO, acting as a bridgehead of the U.S.A., should expand into Eurasia and take control of geostrategically important regions so as to prevent Russias resurgence as a powerful political force.
Brzezinski had in mind two countries or regions in particular: Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire. Russia without Ukraine can still strive for imperial status, but it would then become a predominantly Asian imperial state, more likely to be drawn into debilitating conflicts with aroused Central Asians, who would then be supported by their fellow Islamic states to the south. [...] However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine, with its 52 million people and major resources as well as access to the Black Sea, Russia automatically again regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial state, spanning Europe and Asia.1 Brzezinski argued further that there was an imperative need to gain control of the southern Caucasus, i.e. Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, on Russias southern flank. The past master of U.S. geopolitics set out the aim and purpose of NATO policy with impressive clarity: The United States and the NATO countries while sparing Russias self-esteem to the extent possible, but nevertheless firmly and consistently are destroying the geopolitical foundations which could, at least in theory, allow Russia to hope to acquire the status as the number two power in world politics that belonged to the Soviet Union.2
In the years that followed, these words were systematically put into political practice with NATO taking its eastward expansion right up to Moscows borders. Furthermore, active Western support for the colourful revolutions in Georgia (2003) and Ukraine (2004) led to the sitting pro-Russian or neutral governments and presidents being ousted by pro-Western candidates.3 Russia regarded NATOs policy as crossing the red line. As the war between Russia and Georgia in the summer of 2008 showed, Russia is no longer prepared to stand idly by in the face of further attempts at expansion. Nevertheless, the Western military alliance is doggedly pursuing its escalation policy, in which Ukraine and Georgia are now being offered NATO membership as a means of safeguarding the successes that have been scored. U.S. President Barack Obama is also in favour of these two countries joining NATO.4 The announcement that Michael McFaul, a hardliner on policy towards Moscow, is to be appointed senior director for Russian affairs at the National Security Council gives little cause for hope that Washington under its new president will abandon its aggressive, anti-Russian policy. This amounts to tacit acceptance that the New Cold War between NATO and Russia, invoked so frequently of late, will become a self-fulfilling
polly7
(20,582 posts)It's very helpful to read this and better understand what the Russian people are concerned about.