PART 6
NEW COLD WAR BEGINS
Boris Yeltsin stated that his goal was to transform social economics into a capitalist market economy and nationwide privatization. The 1990's were a period of economic depression and much anxiety about the future. Yeltsin survived a coup attempt and cracked down on political opponents. It was no easy task to move a country from communism to capitalism. There was also a war in Chechnya that was suppressed by the Russian Federation. One must note that the Soviet Union was the first to take notice of the danger of Islamic fundamentalism. While dealing with much adversity, Yeltsin was still re-elected in 1996, but he was in ill health with severe heart problems. On Dec. 31, 1999, Yeltsin resigned and the then prime minister, Vladimir Putin, succeeded him. Putin had moved up quickly from the deputy mayor of St. Petersburg to the prime minister in less than 8 years. Yeltsin had appointed him prime minister in August of 1999, and he was approved by a strong margin in the Duma. He ran for president in the 2000 election and won with 53% of the vote. The Russian economy grew for 8 straight years, helped by high commodity prices. In his first four year term the Gross domestic product increased by 72%. He had some success in diminishing the power of the oligarchs. He was re-elected in 2004 with 73% of the vote. In his second term he increasingly took more power unto himself. He was also president of the "Unity Party" which was becoming the dominate party in the country. He was seen as taking more and more power and began to see an increase in demonstrations and opposition. At the same time he also had made meaningful reforms that bettered the life of Russians. The Unity Party won 64% of the vote in the Duma elections and Putin enjoyed a high popularity with the citizens.
Russia and the United States had favorable relations in many ways, considerable success in limiting nuclear weapons, a joint space venture that continues today, joint support against Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and many more agreements too numerous for this blog. The inclusion of Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary by NATO in 1999 was not protested too much because of the instability of the country and all the problems associated with shifting to a free market economy. But when the next NATO expansion was proposed, and then consummated, the attitude changed to a wariness of the motives of the U.S. and the West. The plan proposed by Bush 2 to station a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic was countered by the Russian Federation. The Federation implied their missiles would be aimed at those installations and it was even suggested that they might take them out. Relations definitely became more tense. There were many meetings with Bush 1, then Clinton, Bush 2, and finally Obama. While much progress was made, the expansion of NATO to former Warsaw Pact countries and then the placing of missiles on their border set the stage for much more distrust. Additionally, Putin accused Secretary of State Hilary Clinton of being involved with internal opposition in the 2011 election. Joe Biden made derogatory comments about the Russian economy and military power, stating that the U.S. had the stronger hand. Neo-cons continuously bragged of defeating the Soviet Union.
In 2008, due to constitutional limits on consecutive terms. Putin was barred from running for president. Dmitry Medvedev was elected president and he appointed Putin as his prime minister. This sparked protests and outrage across the country. Prime minister Putin worked on correcting the demographic declines in the country and encouraging an increase in the birth rate with subsidies. The church was re instituted and the Russian Orthodox church was repaid for property seized after the revolution. In 2012 he was able to again run for the presidency and won with 63% of the vote. While all polling places were monitored, the opposition claimed fraud and international groups claimed irregularities. Tensions with the West increased. In 2012 the Russian Duma, with Putin's support, outlawed homosexual propaganda to minors. They stated that no action was to be taken against homosexuals, but the law was to protect the children. This was followed by outrage in the West.
Up to this time one would have to say Russian actions were mostly resistance to any further encroachment by NATO and a desire to set their own path. The verbal onslaught from the U.S. and the West increased with accusations against Putin and a blatant attempt to embarrass Russia. This was evident during the 2014 Winter Olympics, when Bob Costas, the announcer for NBC sports, degraded everything he could about the Russian facilities and expressed his political bias against everything Russian. While Vladimir Putin may not be the West's image of a democratic leader and this may be true, this situation was not a one sided affair. It seems Russia and Putin pose a dilemma for the U.S. neo-cons who would like to isolate Russia from all foreign affairs and would prefer a cold war and the left who view Putin's rejection of socialism and his resistance to allow homosexual activists a free reign in Russia as treasonous to their cause.
This situation was about to enter a new era of not just Russian resistance, but actual provocation by Putin toward the West.
originally published 1/29/17 part 6 of 7
Russia and the United States had favorable relations in many ways, considerable success in limiting nuclear weapons, a joint space venture that continues today, joint support against Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and many more agreements too numerous for this blog. The inclusion of Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary by NATO in 1999 was not protested too much because of the instability of the country and all the problems associated with shifting to a free market economy. But when the next NATO expansion was proposed, and then consummated, the attitude changed to a wariness of the motives of the U.S. and the West. The plan proposed by Bush 2 to station a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic was countered by the Russian Federation. The Federation implied their missiles would be aimed at those installations and it was even suggested that they might take them out. Relations definitely became more tense. There were many meetings with Bush 1, then Clinton, Bush 2, and finally Obama. While much progress was made, the expansion of NATO to former Warsaw Pact countries and then the placing of missiles on their border set the stage for much more distrust. Additionally, Putin accused Secretary of State Hilary Clinton of being involved with internal opposition in the 2011 election. Joe Biden made derogatory comments about the Russian economy and military power, stating that the U.S. had the stronger hand. Neo-cons continuously bragged of defeating the Soviet Union.
In 2008, due to constitutional limits on consecutive terms. Putin was barred from running for president. Dmitry Medvedev was elected president and he appointed Putin as his prime minister. This sparked protests and outrage across the country. Prime minister Putin worked on correcting the demographic declines in the country and encouraging an increase in the birth rate with subsidies. The church was re instituted and the Russian Orthodox church was repaid for property seized after the revolution. In 2012 he was able to again run for the presidency and won with 63% of the vote. While all polling places were monitored, the opposition claimed fraud and international groups claimed irregularities. Tensions with the West increased. In 2012 the Russian Duma, with Putin's support, outlawed homosexual propaganda to minors. They stated that no action was to be taken against homosexuals, but the law was to protect the children. This was followed by outrage in the West.
Up to this time one would have to say Russian actions were mostly resistance to any further encroachment by NATO and a desire to set their own path. The verbal onslaught from the U.S. and the West increased with accusations against Putin and a blatant attempt to embarrass Russia. This was evident during the 2014 Winter Olympics, when Bob Costas, the announcer for NBC sports, degraded everything he could about the Russian facilities and expressed his political bias against everything Russian. While Vladimir Putin may not be the West's image of a democratic leader and this may be true, this situation was not a one sided affair. It seems Russia and Putin pose a dilemma for the U.S. neo-cons who would like to isolate Russia from all foreign affairs and would prefer a cold war and the left who view Putin's rejection of socialism and his resistance to allow homosexual activists a free reign in Russia as treasonous to their cause.
This situation was about to enter a new era of not just Russian resistance, but actual provocation by Putin toward the West.
originally published 1/29/17 part 6 of 7
PART 7
COLD WAR INTENSIFIES
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, U.S. and the Russian Federation had nearly 20 years of relatively good relations. There were many agreements on nuclear arms reduction, missile defense systems, joint space venture etc. These relations were conducted between George Bush, Bill Clinton, George Bush 2 and Barack Obama. Their Russian counterparts were Mikhail Gorbachev, Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin.
They cooperated on international terrorism and criminal activity, AIDS, and humanitarian issues. Russia was concerned about U.S. involvement in the former Yugoslavia. Russia supported the first gulf war but opposed the invasion of Iraq, but abstained from voting against the U.S. in the U.N.. Russia complained, without taking any action, about the expansion of NATO. The U.S. complained about Russia's action in Chechnya and Georgia, which has a lot to do with Islamic terrorism on their southern border.
One of the Russian Federation's primary goals after the dissolution of the Soviet Union was to be admitted into International organizations on trade, economics etc. They were a permanent member of the U.N. since its founding, but there seemed to be a reluctance by the U.S. to accept them as an influential member of the world community.
While the U.S. has over 200 years of managing a democratic Republic, the Russians have 25 years of transitioning to self government. There were, and still are, many in the state department who would rather keep Russia isolated and contained. This was the objective in the expansion of NATO. It may be that Vladimir Putin began to see that the policy of the west may be to never accept Russia on equal terms, unless they completely submit to the west. This would be in all things, culturally, as well as economically, and a much diminished military capacity. It is understandable that there is a fear of a strong economically prospering Russia, but in the long run can containment result in a positive outcome. Constructive engagement was a term that could possibly yield a positive result.
The Ukraine and the European community had been negotiating cooperation and possible membership since the mid 1990's. There were a lot of hurdles to accomplish this. The EU wanted more human rights, and a stronger legal system among other things. The Ukraine's exports to Russia were over 50% of their economy, much of this generated from the ethnic Russian eastern part of the country. They have many co-operative defense manufacturing agreements, all this was complicated by the EU insistence that if they entered into a free trade agreement with Ukraine, the Ukraine could not be in a free trade agreement with Russia.
The Ukraine was almost entirely dependent on Russia for its energy, mostly natural gas. There was perception that the EU and the U.S. wanted to peel the Ukraine away from the Russian Federation. In 2014 there was a revolution in the Ukraine, President Victor Yanukovych and the parliament were dissolved. This was supported by billions of dollars from Washington to foster democracy in the Ukraine.
The western part of Ukraine was determined to join the EU and was also inclined to join NATO. Eastern Ukraine is mostly a Russian population. Russia did not object to the joining of the EU, but was vehemently against the expansion of NATO right on their border. There was even talk of replacing the Russian Fleets Naval base in Sevastopol, Crimea with a NATO Naval base. This is not likely to ever happen peaceably. This led to the Russian occupation of the Crimea. There was a referendum held in the Crimea and they voted 97% to become incorporated into the Russian Federation. The Ukraine was outraged, the West declared the vote illegal and sanctions were leveled by the West on Russia. The Eastern Ukraine erupted in fighting with 2 areas claiming independence. A pew poll taken shortly after the referendum in Crimea found that 91% believe the referendum was free and fair. Also 88% believed Ukraine should recognize the results.
The Ukrainian, Crimean, Russian conflict is a complicated situation. It seems the West is determined to push Russia farther away from the community of nations. The fact that the U.S. and the West has intervened to control the events in Ukraine's politics and pushed to allow Ukraine into NATO are issues that will not be resolved easily. Russia has now upped the anti by supporting opposition groups in the EU and attempted to disrupt the U.S. election. If Russia would attempt to have bases in Mexico or Canada or Cuba it would be a international crisis. The attempt to encircle and move NATO membership closer and closer to the borders of Russia have most likely come to their limit, unless the West is ready to go to war. It seems the goal may be to encourage regime change in Russia. This is not likely to happen as Putin has a high approval rating in his country and the Russian people understand the situation.
Both Russia and the Ukraine have much to lose in this crisis. There is much interdependence and history between the two countries. It is possible with a new look and a willingness of all parties to cooperate to come to a satisfactory agreement. It is possible that the anti will now be raised much higher, to get the attention of the West and the Ukraine to be more willing for a re-evaluation of their policy of Russian containment. The West, rather than attempting to punish Putin and Russia, should assist in negotiating a reasonable solution.
While, of course this is a brief summary of the history of U.S. relations with the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation. There is much I could not cover in this brief summary. There are more details found in Wikipedia, U.S. state department. and many article by the Kissinger group and others. While some may disagree as to who is at fault for this situation, it cannot be denied that there is a serious crisis at hand. This summary may be useful in understanding this relationship as it will most likely be in the news in the coming months.
originally published 2/8/17 part 7 of 7
The Ukrainian, Crimean, Russian conflict is a complicated situation. It seems the West is determined to push Russia farther away from the community of nations. The fact that the U.S. and the West has intervened to control the events in Ukraine's politics and pushed to allow Ukraine into NATO are issues that will not be resolved easily. Russia has now upped the anti by supporting opposition groups in the EU and attempted to disrupt the U.S. election. If Russia would attempt to have bases in Mexico or Canada or Cuba it would be a international crisis. The attempt to encircle and move NATO membership closer and closer to the borders of Russia have most likely come to their limit, unless the West is ready to go to war. It seems the goal may be to encourage regime change in Russia. This is not likely to happen as Putin has a high approval rating in his country and the Russian people understand the situation.
Both Russia and the Ukraine have much to lose in this crisis. There is much interdependence and history between the two countries. It is possible with a new look and a willingness of all parties to cooperate to come to a satisfactory agreement. It is possible that the anti will now be raised much higher, to get the attention of the West and the Ukraine to be more willing for a re-evaluation of their policy of Russian containment. The West, rather than attempting to punish Putin and Russia, should assist in negotiating a reasonable solution.
While, of course this is a brief summary of the history of U.S. relations with the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation. There is much I could not cover in this brief summary. There are more details found in Wikipedia, U.S. state department. and many article by the Kissinger group and others. While some may disagree as to who is at fault for this situation, it cannot be denied that there is a serious crisis at hand. This summary may be useful in understanding this relationship as it will most likely be in the news in the coming months.
originally published 2/8/17 part 7 of 7
2/14/2021
The U.S. state department is insisting that an invasion by Russia is imminent, that may be true, It has been made clear in the last few weeks that Russia has sent written proposals to the west to address their concerns and complaints, that did not start in the last few weeks, but is rooted in the U.S. policy of containment, coupled with a U.S. policy of regime change anywhere it should choose.
A compromise and suitable agreement is possible, that would insure the independence and security of Ukraine and Russia. It is likely that Germany, France and Ukraine would be seriously interested in such an agreement. It seems the U.S. is unwilling to listen or acknowledge any concerns of Russia. It seems they are determined to continue on the same path of the past, a foreign policy that has destroyed the middle east, destabilized the politics and culture of Europe, and now may very well usher in a new era of instability and chaos in Europe.
This foreign policy has weakened the U.S. both economically and militarily and has damaged the respect formally enjoyed by the United States.
If any agreement is reached it will be from the negotiations of the countries who have the most to lose by a continued confrontation with Russia, such a compromise will be a devastating blow to the ability of the U.S. to control the direction of world events.
Update/5/2025, I will not go into the history of the present war, I assume many more are now paying attention to this matter than were in 2017 when first published. If you can view the past history with an objective view, I suspect you will have a better understanding of how we came to be now on the brink of WW3. A reality that should be important to any sane person.
No comments:
Post a Comment
comments and opinions published at discretion of editor