"The American-Russian relationship" Topic

A great example of how illogical and actually stupid American thinking is on Russia.

link

This article is written by a former US ambassador to Ukraine.

He suggests Russia and America need to work together against China YET everything he promotes is how to hammer Russia more.

There is no carrot dangled here. Literally Russia would be required to retreat from Georgia, Ukraine and Belarus and relinquish its own security objectives.

The Americans would continue to maintain pressure on Russian government to democratise and retain a right to interfere in Russian domestic affairs.

In return for all this, Americans would "support" Russia from any Chinese advances in the far east. No doubt this support would be merely a mild diplomatic rebuke and in any case China is not going to be signing its death warrant by invading a chunk of nuclear armed Russia.

Basically the Americans think Russia needs to become an American tributary state run according to American edicts (ie the American "right" to interfere in Russian politics.) In return Russia would get nothing in return except a pie in the sky promise for support over some unlikely event.

It's as I keep saying – America's ultimate goal is to totally destroy Russia as any sort of power.

For American policy makers Russia is a greater priority than China despite China posing a far greater threat.

The highly biased main stream media in the US certainly soured the US-Russian relationship over the past four years.

"Basically the Americans think Russia needs to become an American tributary state…"

I wish you would phrase this more accurately and say "globalists in the professional bureaucratic class" think Russia needs to become a tributary state, instead of saying "Americans". Most Americans that I know don't have it out for the Russians. The Soviet Union was a real threat to the free world. Contemporary Russia is not the Soviet Union and faces enough trouble holding itself together. I think most Americans are tired of the globalists in both parties who waste American treasure and risk American lives in pursuit of their own fantasies. I am not saying that the Putin regime is an altruistic one that wishes the best for America, but it is certainly not the greatest threat that the U.S. faces. So please stop lumping all Americans, or even most Americans (both on the left and right) in the globalist busy-body camp.

Look, even some of our our allies occasionally carry out espionage against us. So it would be naïve to completely trust any country. That said, while they may never be close allies, there are many areas in which the the US and Russia can cooperate. Whatever the case, at the very least, I think most Americans and most Russians are content to leave each other alone. Both countries have enough to worry about without stirring up animosity against each other.

Kevin,

I think it's clear by "Americans" I am referring to American government, policy makers and key think tanks etc. Y'know the people who run the place and call the shots.

The average American like the average anyone else cares little what other people on the planet are doing.

Yes. Russia is a great political boogeyman used to illicit certain emotions in those over 60. This includes our elected officials. This is a remnant of the Cold War. Certain factions within the government and society have found this residual thinking useful to push their agenda. The production of the insane moral panic of Putin Hacking the Election was this written large.

Younger generations are taught that Putin is a Nazi. All Nazis must be eliminated. It is an odd state of affairs. It however is well supported by the media and thus won't die soon.

Joe Collins

As all of us agree, Russia is a convenient boogeyman. Having little trade between the countries and competing in oil and gas supplies to Europe also helps to keep the media and politics status-quo.

Again, most of our current world affairs are about business. See Saudi Arabia – there was little doubt who wanted this poor journalist dead, and now, after a lengthy investigation it was more or less proved, however both Trump and Biden administartions keeping billion weapon and oil trade, and sanctions are against insignificant Saudi nationals.

There was a funny example during previous round of sanctions against Russia, when state dept included largest Russian titanium producer in the list, as they're the supplier of Russian MoD. What these guys had no clue, that it is also biggest supplier of unhappy Boeing, who just can't afford another blow to its production. I guess Boeing acted fast, and titanium plant was removed from the list in one day….

We've discussed how business interests in China are helping to close eyes of many politicians worldwide.
I was angry when my own company removed access to certain technical imformation I had for almost 20 years bcs I'm from Russia ( If I really wanted to steal smth I had more than enough time to do it really), while they still have production in China and these guys had their access removed 1.5 years later…

The Cold War was never really over, it only "morphed" into a different version, IMO …

So America understand muscovites very well and do the right thing trying to eliminate the back stabbing.

Muscovites play as before WWII, pushing Hitler (now China) against the Western World and hoping to be in the end the winner who takes all. And if China reveal their plans (as Hitler did) and strike first, then America must again help muscovites out. Win-win situation for muscovites as they think.

Nobody thinks that you can win a nuclear war, or somehow sit it out. In the end even New Zealand or Greenland will feel it, therefore the concept is wrong.
The question of help might just be what targets should be uploaded into targeting system of ICBM several minutes before the end of the world.
Being buddies with USA while it tells you what to do and biting all the time is political masochism, we've made this mistake once and it almost cost us the whole country.
If USA wants partnership, it should offer more than kicks.
We still should keep the reasonalble distance from China, as in the end without a nuclear exchange they are going to be the ultimate world power.

Of course nobody can win, but as muscovites say, they will nuke America and go to Heaven but all others go to Hell. So even with this scenario muscovites think they will win.

Nobody thinks that you can win a nuclear war, or somehow sit it out.

I hope so … everybody will eventually be effected.

but as muscovites say, they will nuke America and go to Heaven but all others go to Hell. So even with this scenario muscovites think they will win.

Sounds more like jihadis, islamic terrorists, ISIS, AQ, etc.

don't let the reason to obstruct delusions of the citizens of certain Baltic country ;)

It is very easy to find who's saying what in Internet age.

The Russian leader made the initial remarks on Thursday at the annual Valdai Discussion Club conference in Sochi, Russia, when he was asked about a potential nuclear strike against his country.

"The aggressor must know that retribution is inevitable, that it will be destroyed. We are victims of aggression. As martyrs we will go to heaven," Putin told the audience. "And they will just die," he said with a smile as the audience laughed.

From here:
link

and:

Speaking at his annual media press conference, Putin was asked by one journalist to assess the threat of nuclear war or a third world war.

"The danger of the situation is being downplayed," Putin told the audience of over 1,000 journalists at his year-end question and answer session.

"It now seems to be impossible, something without crucial importance, but at the same time if something like this would happen this would lead to the collapse of the entire civilization and maybe our planet. So this is an important question," he said via a translator.

"Unfortunately, we have this trend to underestimate the current situation. There are dangers, there are risks in our day-to-day lives. What are those risks? First and foremost, the collapse of the international system of arms control, of moving away from an arms race," he said.

From here:

link

Ukraine and Georgia exert much influence over the US governmment as do the Baltic states in their efforts to break away from Russia's orbit and join NATO.

Indeed. It is even easier to just read the offered links, supposed to be denial but turned out to be confirmation. :-)

For example in Barin1 first link we may simply read, that "Russian President Vladimir Putin's press secretary TRIED TO CLARIFY remarks made by the Russian president last week in which he said "as martyrs, we will go to heaven"".

They always tried later to clarify threats like to nuke US to ashes.

But this is not the question. Main point is, that US are learn from history, understand muscovites nature and try not to repeat with Putin these mistakes that were done with Hitler and Stalin.

Do I need to call in the UN here ?

Muscovites play as before WWII, pushing Hitler (now China) against the Western World and hoping to be in the end the winner who takes all. And if China reveal their plans (as Hitler did) and strike first, then America must again help muscovites out. Win-win situation for muscovites as they think.

Conspiracy theory much?

Not at all. More like exaggerated logical conclusion. Muscovites have no capabilities to take all. But they are capable to take their announced targets and a bit more. And they may stab back only when US and China are clashed. This is why muscovites must be neutralized before any actions against China. Not with war (nobody need or want war against muscovites) but as your linked ambassador wisely suggest – friendly.

btw, you said "For American policy makers Russia is a greater priority than China despite China posing a far greater threat." This is even more true when you change there "America" and "Russia".

Barin, stop arguing – is it senseless)))
The best and best-selling product of the Baltic countries today is the cultivation of fear and hatred of Russia. Do not take away the last means of livelihood from the Balts)))

I just love how people are making exaggerated logical conclusions that black is white…

Yes-yes Cuprum, you cultivate the convenient position that all neighbours with no reasons at all fear and hate russians and are russophobes.
And all muscovites agressions against neighbours are not conquests but liberations. :-)

Barin1: "I just love how people are making exaggerated logical conclusions that black is white"
So you declare, that Stalin and Hitler did not start WWII?

Ask the neighbors of Germany if they are passionate about it. Or ask Mexico how happy they are with being close to the United States (although you can ask about love for the United States from many different countries around the world)))). Then you will understand something about the relationship of small countries to their large neighbors)))

And it's time for you to rethink the concepts of the 16th century and come to the twenty-first century. Moscow is four thousand kilometers away from me and there is little that personally connects me with it))) I am a hereditary Siberian, which is quite pleased with)))

Or ask Mexico how happy they are with being close to the United States (although you can ask about love for the United States from many different countries around the world)))).

Not love … they just like how much $ the US will give them every year. For whatever reasons.

The Baltic states are a massive problem for NATO due to their large Russian populations (25% of population). And given those populations are at best discriminated and at worst oppressed, it makes Russian involvement in those countries far more likely.

NATO expansion was badly thought through. It became a glorified defence insurance fund underwritten by USA. None of the new states offers anything militarily, most have not democratised properly and most have long histories of instability with unresolved issues.

At best these countries merely provide strategic depth to western Europe as it means Russians T-90s need to drive that bit longer to get to Berlin.

Rather, the Baltic states are an excellent springboard for an attack on Russia's northern regions.

"170 years ago, on April 25, 1846, the Mexican-American War (Mexican War) began. The war began with territorial disputes between Mexico and the United States after the capture of Texas by the United States in 1845. Mexico was defeated and lost vast territories: the United States was given the Upper California and New Mexico, that is, the lands of the modern states of California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and Utah. Mexico has lost more than 500 thousand square miles (1.3 million square kilometers), that is, half of its territory. "
Should Mexico love the US? No more than the Balts love Russia)))

"170 years ago, on April 25, 1846, the Mexican-American War (Mexican War) began.
Mexico love the US? No more than the Balts love Russia"

Definitely more. As Legion 4 says. US is now helping and supporting neighbour and there are no threat to new wars and territory grabs. Last war was 170 year ago.
But Russian Federation in their 30 year of history as independent country, think in 19th century categories and already waged war against almost all their neighbours who aren't under NATO umbrella. And you tell me to "rethink the concepts of the 16th century and come to the twenty-first century"? :-)

"The Baltic states are a massive problem for NATO due to their large Russian populations (25% of population)."

This is massive problem for these states, not for NATO. You suggest that they should have repatriated these soviet colonists when the soviet occupation ended?

"And given those populations are at best discriminated and at worst oppressed."

Pure nonsense. It is impossible for small nationalities to oppress their bigger neighbour nations. Putin offered money to these soviet colonists, called them to go away from "oppression" and return to their mother birthland but nobody wanted to leave. Quite the opposite, more and more russians are trying to emigrate to the Baltic states to be "under oppression".

But a week ago I watched a video, where couple of Russians in Germany cried and complained that they are oppressed because they are true putinists believers. Help Putin, send troops, our children will be germanized, they are forced to learn German. So Russians may be oppressed in bigger lands, far away from Moscow. In Germany and may be in Australia perhaps.

"None of the new states offers anything militarily"

Actually the Baltic states fulfill all NATO requirements, they are the only ones after US, who spend even more that required 2% to defence. Most of European big countries don't do this. Baltic states are just small ones and cannot offer more than couple of light Brigades each.

"At best these countries merely provide strategic depth to western Europe"

Not only. When Putin starts to build up his regime at beginning of century, it was clear that this will be the corrupt fascist regime. And all fascist regimes need wars for existing, they grow with wars and annexations. We did mistake with Hitler but we must not repeat this with Putler. When all neighbour countries are under NATO umbrella, Putin cannot attack them and this leaves him only one option – go to war against his own people. And as we can see, he already builded up his NaziGuard for that purpose and use it. Or he may search for wars on oversea countries like Syria and Libya.

--

About promoted article.

"He suggests Russia and America need to work together against China YET everything he promotes is how to hammer Russia more."

Don't see anything like this in article.

"Literally Russia would be required to retreat from Georgia, Ukraine and Belarus and relinquish its own security objectives."

Don't see there that also. But it is obvious, that muscovites must stop their agression against neighbours, free annexed territories and pay contributions and reparations.

"Basically the Americans think Russia needs to become an American tributary state.. It's as I keep saying – America's ultimate goal is to totally destroy Russia as any sort of power."

And this is also not written there. Vice versa, there are written – "The United States has no designs on Russia's territorial integrity or sovereignty." And even more – "a largely cooperative relationship with Moscow does not require a change in the current authoritarian political system. The objective here is to assure the Kremlin leadership that the aim of our policy is not to topple them."

So what the hell you talking about?

BTW … Don't get me started on the "situation" on the US-Mexican border as of late. 🤐

Pure nonsense. It is impossible for small nationalities to oppress their bigger neighbour nations. Putin offered money to these soviet colonists, called them to go away from "oppression" and return to their mother birthland but nobody wanted to leave. Quite the opposite, more and more russians are trying to emigrate to the Baltic states to be "under oppression".

You might want to do some reading.

Eg Ethnic Chinese have often been persecuted in SE Asia (eg Indonesia and Malaysia) despite China being a superpower.

Don't see anything like this in article.

Clearly you didn't read the article. First half is dedicated to ideas on how to smash Russia, the second page talks about Russia needing to wake up against China.

This is massive problem for these states, not for NATO. You suggest that they should have repatriated these soviet colonists when the soviet occupation ended?

It's a problem for NATO if these countries' actions prompts Russian action (or is used as an excuse to get involved).

Actually the Baltic states fulfill all NATO requirements, they are the only ones after US, who spend even more that required 2% to defence. Most of European big countries don't do this. Baltic states are just small ones and cannot offer more than couple of light Brigades each

Whoopee do. These states might spend 2% on defence but they need huge NATO resources to protect them. Eg right now NATO is rotating fighter squadrons through for Baltic Air Policing. There are NATO ground troops constantly rotating through them as well.

Latvia, Estonia, and Lithania combined are the size of Finland yet have no air defences (0 fighter aircraft, 0 medium-long range SAM), no heavy armour, no anti-tank helicopters etc. Note Finland has 62 F-18s with long range strike capability and a well developed army.

In a real war these countries' light brigades offer no real capability and need bolstering by NATO forces.

In fact NATO understands they are not defendable so NATO has openly referred to its units in those countries as "trip wire" forces.

Don't see there that also. But it is obvious, that muscovites must stop their agression against neighbours, free annexed territories and pay contributions and reparations.

So despite being from the Baltics you have no idea about Russian security concerns despite these being well known for centuries. Moscow views those countries as essentially buffer states against foreign invasion. Note Russia has been invaded more times than any other major power – Norse, Mongols, Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, Sweden (twice), France Germany (twice), interventions by British (twice – 1851 and 1919), Japan (twice – 1904 and 1930s), the USA (1919-25) etc etc.

If Russia is to allow Ukraine, Georgia etc to enter NATO it has relinquished its security interests and allowed US to encircle it (basically the goal of the Truman policy).

"The United States has no designs on Russia's territorial integrity or sovereignty." And even more – "a largely cooperative relationship with Moscow does not require a change in the current authoritarian political system. The objective here is to assure the Kremlin leadership that the aim of our policy is not to topple them."

Except you neglect this bit:

We are strong believers in and advocates for democracy and an open society; and our policy towards Russia should feature increased outreach to the Russian people, including cultural and student exchange programs… Still, we must retain the right to criticize (and more) anti-democratic activity and human rights abuses, as we are doing now in connection with the arrest of Alexei Navalny.

So the US views that it has a right to "increased outreach to Russian people" which literally mans the US will attempt to subvert the Russian people.

If the Russians did this to the American people, the Americans would rightly call it foreign influence.

The article also clearly maintains an American right to intervene against Russian "non-democratic activities."

It is all rank hypocrisy given some of America's key allies being islamo-fascist dictatorships and given the Americans are largely silent about China's genocides of minorities. Ukraine is corrupt, infested with neo-nazis and a broderline dictatorship on par with Russia.

In essence the Americans wail on Russia because they can and they need an enemy to justify a lot of things.

Note if Americans didn't engage in regime change in Libya, Iraq etc, go outside their mandate over Kosovo, didn't expand NATO as per original negotiations and didn't openly interfere in Russian politics, then Russia would probably have not invaded Ukraine or re-annex Crimea.

The Americans have also been trying to destroy Russian nuclear deterrent by placement of THAAD in Poland and Romania. Americans claim defence from Iranian missiles but this is clearly untrue. A THAAD Romania is pointed against Russia not Iran.

Russia may be a dictatorship and largely unpleasant place to live BUT the current state of affairs is because of NATO/American actions.

And even in articles like this where they talk about supposed cooperation, the Americans promote essentially destroying Russia as any sort of power and turning it into a vassal state beholden to US.

----

EDIT Forgot to mention, the US actually met with the Chechen leader in the 1990s and expressed support for some Chechen separatists. Putin has claimed west directly supported Chechens but this is yet to be proven. John McCain supported independence of Chechnya, Dagestan and other regions.

link

So much for USA supporting Russian territorial integrity.

Further to this, Biden just called Putin a killer. Biden also said Russia will pay a price for its meddling in Russian elections (fair enough!)

link

In any case it's clear we're seeing a pivot in US policy circles. Russia is the new enemy again.

No doubt this will allow US to allow Chinese situation to die down and go back to the Obama era status quo whereby China could do as it pleased. Indeed it's already evident to some eg Russia gets reprimanded for cyber attacks but China does not:

link

It all smacks of the old Islamic Empires (Ottomans, Persians etc) focusing on each other whilst ignoring the growing threat arising out of western Europe.

Scary.
Generally speaking, China has managed to influence many people from the West to remain neutral at worst or friendly, money and privileges being great facilitators. This is not an uncommon tactic but it has been used at an unprecedented pace with long term strategy in mind. The US definitely has had such programs to ease its economic presence and influence around the world. Strictly nothing new here.
At the moment, it appears best to deflect rivalry toward the second "best enemy", Russia that is playing its own hand. US and Europe leadership seem a bit too prompt to oblige.

Basically, a lot of covert actions are at play, money and economic being the core interests.

Oh, and "Freedom" and the Baltic people are of very little interest to anyone. Really.

In any case it's clear we're seeing a pivot in US policy circles. Russia is the new enemy again.

No doubt this will allow US to allow Chinese situation to die down and go back to the Obama era status quo whereby China could do as it pleased. Indeed it's already evident to some eg Russia gets reprimanded for cyber attacks but China does not:

Yep – the Democrats invented Russian Collusion! as a domestic attack tool on Trump, and having been caught out doubled down to try and make their fabrication into reality to avoid political penalty no matter the damage to US security interests.

Interesting…Russian oil and gas are so dangerous to European democracy that USA is pushing more and more sanctions, while it seems the same oil is very much sought fy USA itself…

U.S. Thirst for Russian Oil Hits Record High Despite Tough Talk
link

Well, of course we know that all this bs has nothing to do with democracy, but may be it is time to stop pretending that it is anything but business interests of ruling groups…