I don't understand what's so special in his statement when in reality I wrote about it for many years in this blog. Namely that there are only three powers in the world now who define its future: USA, China and Russia. How about this, six years ago:
And I was writing about it non-stop. Russians are not interested--apart from it being impossible--of fighting a war in the US proper or hoisting the flag over the White House. Superpowers, and the US is a superpower, move in a very different universe. Consider this excrement from from Graham Allison, but substitute Russia with the US:
Of course, Russian strategic symmetric attitude is also driven by traditional Russian humanism--a feature non-existent among Washington's genocidal maniacs--but strategically it is correct: war between two nuclear superpowers will bring about a global catastrophe. Graham Allison is full of shit, as most political "scientists" are, but he is correct about suicide. So, Medvedev articulates what was and is obvious. The only twist in his otherwise self-evident stratagem is Europe. The fact that Europe is done and Russia is not going to make any arrangements with it other than dictating conditions on which Russia may soften Europe's descend into the third world, which is happening as I type this. With the US, strategically, arrangements are not only necessary but inevitable, unless, of course, the US disintegrates which would change the game, or, God forbid, the real war breaks out between Russia and the US.
It is understandable that Medvedev's statement coincided with increasingly loud voices from Washington about "peace talks" between Russia and 404. It is wrong impression--do not mistake Washington's (desperate) desires for Kremlin's policies. Ukraine is gone as a state--it is a virtual pseudo-state supported by West's money, while having its military utterly destroyed and the question here is how many war criminals from NATO will be charged once Tribunal proceedings open in earnest. As I am on record ad nauseam--the ONLY issue for Russia now is how far she wants to go and how much she gains territoriality, e.g. Odessa. The ONLY "peace talks" between Russia and 404 possible will look like this:
1. Confederalization of 404 with eventual break up.
2. Full disarmament with only police force existing in its most basic form.
3. No NATO presence in any form.
4. War criminals transferred to Russian justice.
5. De facto, external governance from Moscow.
Something along those lines. Don't quote me on that, Russia has superb lawyers who will arrange it better than me.
So, stop panicking. And yes, the United States now need desperately an off-ramp. I doubt Russia will get it easily to US because modern Washington is non-agrement capable and Kremlin is keenly aware of that. Medvedev talks about new generation of US politicos who may emerge (some are emerging) as people Moscow can work with.
I also love to use Andrei Andreevich Gromyko's famous dictum that ten years of negotiations is better than one day of war. United States desperately needed a summit with Russia after the events around LDNR in April this year. The United States needed this dialogue for a variety of reasons and Russians, as I state non-stop for many years, will talk to the devil himself if need be, because Russians know what real war is better than anyone in the world, let alone American politicians, and Russians are, obviously, keenly aware of the fire power they have at their disposal. At Geneva both sides agreed to talk about "strategic stability".
So, now the dance starts. Speaking today at theCarnegie International Nuclear Policy Conference, Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov made a number of interesting points, albeit I cannot even imagine what poor Ryabkov should have thought about this gathering at CIA... pardon me, ahem... Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (LOL))), since at 2:00 after Ryabkov's keynote address, this "esteemed" org had this event planned:
Toward Equity and Antiracism in Nuclear Policymaking. Many national security
institutions—including those in the nuclear policy field—are
strengthening their diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. Such
efforts focus on the important goal of incorporating diverse voices
in spaces where they have historically been underrepresented, but what
else should equity in nuclear policymaking entail? What are the barriers
to achieving equity? How could diversity, equity, and inclusion
efforts contribute to achieving an antiracist foreign policy? And, how
might such efforts ultimately affect policy outcomes on contemporary
nuclear issues, including Iran, North Korea, nuclear weapons
modernization, and disarmament?
So, nuclear power is now racist. Poor Ryabkov, poor Lavrov--now you understand why Lavrov is a chain smoker? You would become one when you have to deal with woke imbeciles who have nuclear weapons and nuclear power at their disposal--a classic case of a monkey with a grenade. I am sure they need diversity officers on US Navy's SSBNs of Ohio-class and operators of US nuclear power stations should only be judged and allowed to carry out their duties at the controls of nuclear power stations only after they pass Critical Race Theory exam, which, of course, automatically opens many vacancies for "diverse voices". The US is becoming a third world country with an astonishing speed. So, famous Lavrov's meme is perfectly applicable to this situation. But, moving on.
Translation:In the immediate future both our countries will undertake a new round of a multi-level strategic dialogue. We expressed our readiness to undertake this dialogue energetically and without any delay. I hope that in the nearest future negotiating teams will start consultations.
What consultations you may ask. Let me me give you my impression--those consultations will start with defining red lines for Russia. Russians have a very good idea about those red lines and what they want to accomplish.
1. Not to stumble into a direct military conflict, which will have catastrophic consequences for the world. Evidently now the American side also wants this.
2. Russia is ready to discuss US' main concern of Russia's arsenal only so far and even that "so far" will require from the US very serious quid-pro-quo but will not change the balance of power.
3. No negotiations on China-Russia alliance, period.
This will be the start of the dance. The United States desperately needs to win some time, because it thinks that slowing down what I describe for years as Real Revolution in Military Affairs driven by Russia, it has a chance to address at least some exponentially growing gaps in crucial military systems. United States needs to at least try (it is trying now) to get near actual workable hyper-sonic weapon and, possibly, some directed energy weapon. This may happen but even the brief review of preliminary results and progress confirm what many Russian weapons specialists stated many times: probably around 10 years before IOC for such an American weapon. By then Russia will be in the new generation of such weapons and the issue of anti-missile defense inevitably comes forth.
Well, frankly, I don't see how the United States can close this ever-widening gap. With A-235 Nudol and S-500 effectively in IOC and S-400 incorporating S-500's newest radar Yenisey and sharing long range missiles with it, not to mention a plethora of advanced air-defense systems (such as S-350) being deployed--the United States will try to slow down next generation of Russian ABM, Anti-hypersonic and similar systems as much as it can, but Russian advantage here is so massive, that it is difficult to imagine what can the US even propose. When I write that the United States lost the arms race I really mean it, because this is exactly what have happened. The United States bases around the world, as well as the US proper are simply defenseless against Russia's arsenal. The United States wants to talk about it. It also wants to talk about Petrel (Burevestnik) and Poseidon which destroy any hope for the crazies in D.C. to survive. But in general, the MAIN driver in this dialogue for the United States is this: the fear of Russia reaching eventually the threshold beyond which, as American "thinkers" perceive it, she will be able to destroy the United States with a minimal or acceptable damage to herself. This is what really drives many D.C. politicos and is the main reason why the United States literally imposed itself on Russia in Geneva.
But here is the point. Russia will reach this threshold, especially when one considers America's dramatic departure, across the board, in civilizational competition from a position of leadership but here where it all doesn't fit Western logic. Russians abhor war, they hate it, they cannot stand it. Arguably the greatest prose ever written is about hatred of war. It is Russian prose. Today, is the 80th dark anniversary of the unified forces of Europe headed by Nazi Germany committing what Leo Tolstoy wrote about the other war which took place 129 years earlier:
Change the date to June 22, 1941... The whole notion that Russians, who came to abhor war on a genetic level would want to attack first the United States and kill millions upon millions of innocent people: women, children, old people defies imagination and fits perfectly the perverted minds of US establishment none of who ever saw their own wives, children, dear ones killed by being bombed. Yet, when I write about Russia's history being solzhenitsified and being non-existent in any operational sense in the US, here is what the United States "knows" even today. In fact, this is the only thing they know.
This is what Russians grimly mark today on the 80th--their fallen boys and girls, a generation almost entirely wiped out by the combined Europe in 1418 days of WW II. And that is why Russians will negotiate for ten years because they know, unlike their ignorant and uncultured counterparts, that those ten years are better than one day of war. And that is why Russia will never allow her weapons to fall behind. As it is known to every Russian: nobody is forgotten, nothing is forgotten. Simple as that.
She is a magnificent ship (ship, not the air wing) but her CO's cliche about Cat and Mouse game is a bit dated. It was possible to play that in 1970s and even into the 80s. Nowadays, with modern sensors and space-based means of recon--easy to track and develop firing solution on anything above the surface, let alone such a huge ship. Even under the severest of EMCON procedures.
History, life in general, could be ironic alternating between the dark and lighter side. But when Ronald Reagan's adviser on Russia and unofficial Reagan's personal envoy to Gorbachev Suzanne Massie asks, while live on TV (NTV), Vladimir Putin for Russian citizenship, one should really start questioning the reality of modern West. Massie is not your average citizen, she never was. She was a crucial player in convincing Ronald Reagan that USSR was not really the "evil empire" and she shuttled between Reagan and Gorbachev (often unknown for D.C. establishment) trying to arrange the end of the Cold War.
The response from Kremlin, so far, was understandably restrained with Peskov merely stating (in Russian) that there are "certain bureaucratic procedures" which must be followed. I am sure, in the end, Massie will get her citizenship and she is too public of a figure not just in Russian-American but global politics to be subjected to the full process, including an obvious consideration of her age. She just wants to stay in Russia and wants to play her part in the drama which unfolds between the United States and Russia. She is very vocal about the state of modern United States and doesn't like Biden and calls him a marionette and calls D.C. a swamp. Today, in Moscow, she drinks vodka, celebrating 35th Anniversary of the 1980s first US-Soviet Summit in Iceland.
So, this grandma still has a lot of mileage in her intellectually and, as I emphasize constantly, she is by far not the only one from the West who seeks refuge in Russia and the number of people like that will continue to grow. It is not anymore a theorem it is an axiom. Just take a look at that:
WTF, man, WTF!!!! The Armed Forces are the reflection of the society and once they become THIS, I don't know, what's next? The West disintegrates culturally in front of our eyes and it is so obvious that programming and justification for the eradication of the heterosexual white male in the West as such is underway big time. Testosterone is now verboten in America. Just compare:
Translation:This... is the first day of your new life.What was yesterday means nothing now.Who you were before, no-one cares now.What's important now is—who you'll be today.What do you know about yourself?What are you capable of?Questions may remain unanswered, but can you sleep soundly later on?Knowing yourself, knowing the limit of your possibilities...To hell with limits.Are you ready to break yourself?Every day, pain hardens you here.It was you who decided to prove something to yourself.The commander is here only for you to see an enemy in him, because without the enemy, there is no battle. Because without battle, there is no victory.But in reality, the main enemy is you.The you of yesterday.Your task is to track the enemy down, catch up to him, outperform him, become better than him, and return the victor.Because tomorrow is the first day of your new life.
Make your own conclusions.
P.S. Announcement. For people who cannot buy my latest book (paperback) from Amazon, this is not because it is "not available" but because they simply sold out whatever they had (Temporarily out of stock) and the new batch is on its way. Kindle edition is available, though.
To have normal, like in not a perpetual war of a different variety, relations between Russia and the US? The answer is rather simple--the United States views Russia as an existential threat. But that is a blanket, however correct, statement, the devil is in details. Let me explain. I am on record for years that the field of Russia Studies in the US is a wasteland. Even Matthew Rojansky, whose candidacy has been successfully sabotaged recently by neocon mafia which infested US foreign policy establishment top bottom, is not really an "expert" in Russia--he is an "expert" in US "think-tankdom" echo-chamber hustle and rubbing shoulders with big honchos, which then migrate onto CVs and Resumes for bearers to be recycled in the cesspool of Beltway "expertdom". The fact that Rojansky doesn't want an outright war with Russia and passes for a "realist" in D.C. was enough to remove him from the pool of "Russia Experts" trying to make it into the Biden Admin. Well, even an iota of a common sense towards Russian-American relations is a disqualifying trait in D.C.
Now recall Alexander Vindman, A Ukrainian Jew in the rank of Lieutenant Colonel who decided that he, not the President of the United States, is to define what kind of relations the United States must have with Ukraine and Russia. When one has such people as Vindman and a cabal of neocons being omnipresent in the establishment, it is bad enough. But then comes a "heavy artillery" of US main stream media, which are literally a propaganda machine which drives a complete destruction of Russian-American relations on the American side and "experts" there range from psychopaths such as Max Boot, deranged and confused non-binary russophobes such as Masha Gessen, to some butt-hurt ignoramuses such as "Doctor" Stephen Blank, who though it possible sending US Navy's ships to... the Sea of Azov. As you may have noticed already, a huge portion of this army of psychopaths consists of former Soviet or Russia's citizenry, primarily, but not exclusively (let's be objective), of a Jewish descend, who, instead of learning and working for the benefit of the American national interests, among which not being wiped off the map by Russia, should be a primary one, are in it for settling all kinds of accounts and grievances, most of them totally made up and fake, with Russia. If it takes US bureaucracy and sacrificing US interests, so be it in their opinions.
But what about middle level "journalist", are there any people of common sense who view Russian-American relations as crucial for global stability? Hm. Here is an example of yet another former Soviet "journo" (euphemism for not being educated), a graduate of the Moscow State University and MBA writing on the issues of modern geopolitics and Russia from Toledo, Ohio. His name is Mike Sigov.
As is the case with many former "Russians" who get to write for all kinds of US media outlets, few of them really have any background in the issue of modern geopolitics and fields adjacent to it. What they have, which ultimately qualifies them for spreading mostly BS, is their ability to read and speak Russian and navigate Moscow Metro. They also have a lot of "feelings" towards their place of birth and as a result one gets such a mental excrement as Sigov provides:
Ukraine has long been pressing NATO to admit it as a member, but the
defense alliance has been reluctant so far to expedite the long process
of extending its membership to Ukraine, without openly denying it one. NATO
membership would all but secure Ukraine from Russian aggression but
also would mandate that all the member countries — the United States
included — treat such an act as a war on each one of them as well. To
be sure, Ukraine's accession to NATO would increase the stakes for the
United States and other members of the alliance in Ukraine. The alternative may be worse, however.
Sigov, having no clue what he is writing about and calling on Ukraine being admitted to NATO, should understand one very simple constant of modern geopolitics--Russia can annihilate any force in Eastern Europe, including combined NATO forces, even without the use of nuclear weapons and in this case, Russia will end Ukrainian statehood, much less Ukrainian armed forces, in a matter of days. Yes, Russians do not want this shithole of a country on their balance, but if push comes to shove, what will happen will be more than just annihilation of Ukraine as we know it today--a Nazi shithole and a used condom for neocons--Russia will demonstrate a complete military impotence of the United States and NATO which will be left to the only device they have at their disposal, you guessed it, propaganda. Russia CAN reject Europe, Europe CANNOT reject Russia and if Mr. Sigov doesn't understand that, I am sorry, he should have chosen a serious field of study to wrap his brains around this simple fact.
Yet, this doesn't prevent him from agitating for a situation which could be much worse than the Cuban Missile Crisis, because the United States, having very limited conventional, not to speak of combined arms, capabilities will have no chance other than commit whatever troops it will able to assemble, for annihilation in Ukraine and will, being inherently nuclear-biased country, resort to escalation towards nuclear threshold, because what the United States doesn't like is to lose big. It will not get any bigger than getting a death wish of fighting Russian Armed Forces in Ukraine granted. The moment any announcement about Ukraine "joining" the NATO is made, that seals the fate of not just Ukraine, it seals the fate of Europe and of the United States. Mr. Sigov, in a fine tradition of "Russian" (wink, wink) immigration to the US, and having no viable skills other than spreading BS and grievances, provides an Exhibit A of a "materiel" which dominates America's field of "Russia Studies" and foreign policy establishment, and which bears a huge share of responsibility for royally fucking it up for the US, and the world, in the time the US desperately needs not only face saving but a dramatic rethinking of its suicidal in its sheer incompetence foreign policy, which bankrupted the country and exposed it as a big bully capable only of big words.
Yet, Mike Sigov is an embodiment of Russian-American troubles. The United States' government institutions are neoconised and ukrainised thoroughly, top-bottom, and that is why any semblance of normality in Russian-American relations is impossible and, in fact, they will continue to deteriorate and for that, the United States has only itself to blame. I omit here sheer idiocy of American geopolitical "thinking" of the last 30 years which should be studied as a severe case of a delusion--I wrote three books on that, and may yet write another one--but even some weak signals from Biden Admin about desire to talk to Russia, in a feeble attempt to "free" dwindling and grossly overstated resources to fight China, even these signals are successfully distorted, suppressed and the transmitter is sabotaged, because the United States' foreign policy is completely subverted by ethnic and religious mafias operating within the establishment and media. If Putin-Biden summit happens, in the end, we will see what happens after it and I don't hold my breath, because the United States is non-agreement capable entity and armies of Mike Sigovs are standing by, ready to sabotage any possible move towards normalization of Russian-American relations. That is why such a normalization is not possible in the foreseeable future. That is not to mention that Russia and China seem to be committed to each-other in a geopolitical sense and the US has nothing, zilch, nada to offer Russia.
In related news, new Russian Armed Forces Cathedral held an Easter Liturgy yesterday.
I can only imagine what US "Russian Experts" think looking at it.
An "interesting" piece from Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor-in-chief of Russia in
Global Affairs, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and
Defense Policy (SVOP), and research director of the Valdai International
Discussion Club. SVOP is a cabal of politologists and "associated" people, such as late legendary Evgenii Primakov, but is mostly known today for a bunch of "liberals" such as slick opportunist Sergei Karaganov from VShE who pretend that they know how power balance is formed. Lukyanov is an epitome of humanities--uneducated "analyst" (not to mention being associated with a cloaca of VShE) and he doesn't disappoint writing on the issues he has no idea about. In fact, he is clueless. He makes an astonishing claim re: Russian-American relations:
I don't know what stone did Mr. Lukyanov sleep in the last 20 years under, but since Russia and the United States STILL possess 90% of the world's nuclear arsenal, the necessity to manage it still remains one of the major points on the agenda of Russian-American relations. He proceeds with elaboration on this point:
With the nuclear issue losing its pivotal role, there is practically
nothing of substance left in US-Russian relations. Granted, there are
some smaller-scale technical issues to take care of, such as avoiding
accidental clashes in Syria or strengthening diplomatic cooperation to
tackle the problem of North Korea. There would probably still be
contacts on topics related to former Soviet countries, but that's more
about making your intentions clear – not about agreeing on a common
position.
I understand that Mr. Lukyanov was probably a good journalist for a bunch of rags in Russia and maybe even rubbed shoulders with some luminaries but specialist in modern power balance he is not and never was, and never will be, as will not be Karaganov or many other demagogues with egos larger than cathedrals populating this non-governmental org, SVOP that is. As such his assumptions are risible, because Russia is named in every doctrinal document in the US and is mentioned as present and clear danger to America by every single US top echelon official, from Pentagon to Department of State. Yet, Lukyanov who wouldn't know the difference between anti-shipping cruise missile and motorcycle comes up with a typical incompetent BS:
For Russia, a critical aspect of this previous experience is its
excessive fixation on the United States – to the detriment of other
areas of development. This is something that must be thrown overboard,
as quickly as possible.
I would suggest Mr. Lukyanov to conduct a forensic experiment and go out and piss off some crazy Caucasus (Chechen, Dagestani or Ingush) body-builder on the street and then remain not excessively "fixated" on his and his family's safety. The whole notion that some political "scientist" or journo who wouldn't be able to grasp nitty-gritty of running even WW II-era diesel sub, not to speak of division of nuclear ones or what is going on in terms of strategic stability on the level of modern weaponry and sensors, as integrated into the decision making on the highest military-political level, can have a competent opinion is risible. Yet, here we are--another ignoramus, who never got to serve even as a private in any capacity in any force waxes "strategic" by parading his ignorance reiterating the point:
For Russia, a new era will only begin once our leadership – who remain
overly preoccupied with Russia's relations with the US, believing
themselves to be in some sort of unique and historic position – listen
to the Russian people, for whom America is just another foreign land. An
important one, yes, but no more than that. When it comes to Russia's
relations with the US, the less we get carried away by feelings of
self-importance and misplaced superiority, the better it would be for
everyone, ourselves included.
So, I don't know where Lukyanov gets his points of view, but somebody better whisper to his and his colleagues' ears that the political "science" is not science neither is profession of journalism a valid occupation. To pass competent judgement on issues of a strategic stability and actual power--this is beyond Lukyanov's competencies, even if he thinks that rubbing shoulders with Russia's national security professionals does provide rubbing off fundamental knowledge and competencies which allow people in Russia to make decisions which go radically counter to Lukyanov's platitudes presented as a deep thought, which it is not. In times like these only raw military-industrial power is a viable insurance against a variety of contingencies which end up in massive military clash. I think Lukyanov should take his advice to Russia and apply it to himself, like this:
the less I (Fyodor Lukyanov) get carried away by feelings of
self-importance and misplaced superiority, the better it would be for
everyone.
Especially when trying to apply skills in philology to complex matters of national security of Russia whose people overwhelmingly view the United States as a very real threat for themselves. The only thing on which I agree with him--for Russia it makes no difference who comes to power in D.C. Russia will remain America establishment's main threat for reasons of which Lukyanov has very little, if any, understanding. But larger question in all that is how a person with minimal military-political credentials can pass for "expert" in Russia--the explanation to this is very simple, a putrid belch of Russia's "liberal experiment" of 1990s and 2000s when people like Lukyanov wormed their way into the lucrative sphere of Russia's "expertdom" by learning many buzz-words and catch-phrases without having a grasp of their real meaning.
First, Huntsman has to specify this "desired effect" of sanction for who? Sanctions worked, actually, a miracle for Russia who, while having increasingly fewer meaningful economic ties to the United States grows her real economy sector quite well. Secondly, does Mr. Ambassador understand that the United States is an ungovernable entity in the state of slow collapse of its governing institutions due to an insidious coup of the Democratic Party and so called (lack of) Intelligence Community against legitimately elected POTUS (no matter how bad or good he is). Does Mr. Ambassador know who this lovely woman is?
Inga Yumasheva is a Member of Parliament (Duma) of Russia from Republic of Bashkortostan and just few days ago she was, well read yourself:
As Inga herself stated today (in Russian) it was a very unpleasant situation. Yes, especially if one considers the fact that after an hour of interrogation she was offered by FBI agent an informal meeting in some cafe. Yes, she is damn attractive woman, very feminine. She, however, added today, that we need to separate American people and US government. Or, I may add, rather lack there of, since, evidently FBI runs its own constitution, CIA does something else, House Democrats continue to lead a coup against legitimate President, while State Department lives in its own world with its own rules and acts as it thinks fit, POTUS and White House be damned:
So, can Mr. Huntsman, please, point out some people in Washington D.C. who are actually competent enough and have enough clout to hold their end of the bargain in case any dialogue between Russia and the US proceeds? Talking just for the sake of talking and maintaining contacts, of course, is fine but, as has been stated not for once--the United States is not an agreement-capable side, anymore, and that is a defining fact behind the mess which US foreign and domestic policies are. In the end, who knows, US Department of Agriculture may decide to arrest Sergei Lavrov next time he visits the United States, and why not?
Fionna Hill is a typical Brookings Institute and, particularly, late Richard Pipes', "product" (confused neocon that is) with "expertise" in Russia and Former Soviet Union being primarily in her knowledge of Russian language. But it is interesting that she still made it to Moscow in a very non-public manner. Which leads us to two possibilities:
1. She (and she is a perfect candidate for such a role, as any neocon is) may have been sent in a futile attempt to dictate to Russia some US demands. Well, Russia saw bigger and better bullies than her and remained unimpressed whatsoever. In general, trying to pressure Russia doesn't work, plus the United States realistically is not in any position to dictate anything. So, in this case we may assume that she went to Moscow with a different mission.
2. That different mission could be an attempt to arrange some kind of process with Russia which may lead to unfreezing of bilateral relations which would make possible some kind of "deal" in a long run. Strangely, such a mission and whatever this hypothetical deal may be, could be even more difficult than trying to bully Russia because Russians:
a) Fully recognize own strength and the geopolitical trend, they themselves are setting to a large degree;
b) US is not viewed as treaty-worthy subject anymore.
Indeed, try to BS anyone about "democracy" and US being a good partner, especially in Moscow, after what happened in the US in the last two years. One will get this reaction:
So, what could be Hill's mission? A "probe"? Sure! but not only that. But I don't think that Russians treat most US envoys anymore as worthy of paying attention to since current US elites, especially of Hill's "quality", are nothing more than mindless automatons capable to only repeat beaten to death cliches which have as much relation to a reality as US being "democracy" and having freedom of speech. As real American professional (among many others) who did risk his life for the country noted:
I agree with Phil Giraldi--it is depressing to see all that, especially understanding that these were such people as Hill and other neocons infesting currently Trump Administration who played a crucial role in bringing the US and the world to the place where it is today, all, mind you, under the misleading false slogans.
Which is a defining feature of the US so called "journalist corps". In his utterly delirious piece in the American Conservative he waxes geopolitical and continues to spread all kinds of beaten to death cliches about Russia. For starters, he repeats a tiresome Wall Street claptrap about Russian economy.
Obviously because Depetris is an American "journalist" and it automatically means that he has no tools for operating with facts on the ground and it can come as a surprise to him that Russia's GDP actually dwarfs that of Italy and is already larger than that of Germany. Even IMF agrees on that, not Depetris, of course. Somebody forgot to inform Depetris about this teeny-weeny fact but, be patient, Depetris is not alone in his economic delusion--he is, actually, very typical of US punditry whose defining characteristic is ignorance.
But by far the most astonishing in all this is Depetris' delusions is the title of his piece:
You see? So simple! OK guys, it is over now let's get better relations. He even proposes:
The report is also a plus for the country—not only because Washington
won’t be consumed with a constitutional crisis anytime soon, but also
because it provides the Trump administration with its first opportunity
to settle on a Russia policy without the risk of an extreme political
backlash.
Life is so easy, you see? Of course, I have news for optimistic (a euphemism for delusional) Depetris:
1. Yes, Trump Administration "settled" Russia policy will be (already is) all out, short of hot, war on Russia and this war is already proceeding in earnest. Things will get even worse, much worse, than they are now. This is not to mention the fact that Trump is not very smart geopolitically and his "team" of foreign policy "experts" is a laughing stock of the world--a bunch of aggressive exceptionalist neocons.
2. Patrick Armstrong yesterday when posting his Russia SitRep provided this astonishing piece of data. Just think about it for a second:
I know that Depetris has no clue on that but I have to inform him that EU for Russia, strategically, economically, culturally is on several orders of magnitude more important than the United States. In fact, the only real importance, diminishing daily, of the United States for Russia is the fact that US tries to sabotage (unsuccessfully) Russian economy. But if Russia gave up on the EU, what's so important for Russia in the US? US doesn't even factor in economically here.
This, however, doesn't prevent Depetris from continuing with his delusion:
But with the investigation complete, the report submitted, and the
conclusions made, the Trump administration may now have a chance to at
least explore whether the Russians are open to collaboration on fair
terms.
No, Mr. Depetris, Russians are "not open" to "collaboration on fair terms" and the only things Russia is going to discuss with the US are strategic arms limitations and the terms on which US economy will be landed. Russia doesn't want it to be a global economic catastrophe but a slow and relatively soft landing. In general, people who keep the gun to your head do not "collaborate", they usually dictate conditions, but I am sure Daniel Depetris knows all about it--sarcasm is intentional. He also is not aware of a simple fact of the United States committing final act of cultural suicide in Russia. If Depetris doesn't comprehend that, nothing will prevent him from continuing to write a delusional rubbish such as his piece in TAC.
UPDATE: Masha Zakharova explains as eloquently as always (Skabeeva's shoes are always top) things which Depetris obviously doesn't understand.
