Harbinger of a New Cold War?

One of the strangest observations about the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014 is that it could lead to a new Cold War.

A new Cold War? What happened to the old one?

The so-called Cold War, which erupted after World War II, when the victorious allies belatedly discovered that their eastern partner, the USSR, has uncloaked itself as the new enemy, came to an end only in the minds of leaders of the free world.

The Kremlin leaders of the USSR and the Russian Federation never regarded the Cold War to be over. As faithful adherents of their imperial ideology of expansion by peaceful, clandestine or military means, Russia will continue to be engaged in all forms of combat with its “near abroad,” NATO and the US until it ultimately prevails, vanquishes or subdues its enemies, and emerges victorious.

The smashing of the Berlin Wall, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, and the decolonization of Ukraine and the other Soviet “republics” was not regarded as a fait accompli by Russian leaders. That bitter pill was difficult for them to swallow but they did not lose heart and lick their wounds. They retrenched and devoted money and attention to build their conventional and military might and security policy in order to restore in time the global superiority of Holy Mother Russia.

If that game plan is difficult to believe, just look around at what’s happening. Russian tanks and troops are on the move in Ukraine and in the air and seas around Europe, and even the US and Australia.

Russia’s plan to achieve global superiority of Holy Mother Russia is stoked by three points: Washington’s opposition to its policies, NATO’s anti-Russian policy, and, especially, the loss of Ukraine and the other former captive nations.

In Russian leaders’ minds, the first two points must be neutralized and the last one must be returned to the previous status of a captive nations.

Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST) and member of the Public Council under the Russian Defense Ministry, discussed all of these points in an article on valdaiclub.com on Aug. 15, 2013 – shortly after Putin’s visit to Kyiv, where he laid down his warning that Ukraine must return to the fold or else.

“It is important to note that in the foreseeable future, Russia will retain its complete military superiority over the former Soviet republics, and maintain its military-strategic dominance in the former Soviet territories,” Pukhov wrote. “As for the possibility of the conflicts of the second type, relations between Russia and the US are now largely based on typical great power rivalry of the kind that existed in the 19th century.”

US-Russia relations have always resembled typical great power rivalry but mostly due to Russia’s adventurism and mission of dominating the world.

Pukhov elaborated on Russia’s three defense security goals:

•         Putting military-political pressure on the domestic and foreign policies of the former Soviet republics, and using military force against these republics, if such force is required to protect Russian national interests.
•         Military deterrence of the US and the NATO countries, with the primary goal of preventing any Western meddling in conflicts in the former Soviet republics or Western attempts to forestall possible Russian actions with regard to these republics
•         Participation in countering internal threats such as separatism and terrorism.

Pukhov explained why NATO is in Russia’s crosshairs: “NATO is still being regarded by Moscow as the main external military threat. For all the efforts made in the post-Soviet period, the Russia-NATO relationship has not become a partnership. Such a situation is, in fact, entirely natural, due to the obviously different nature of the two sides’ military-political views and interests.

“NATO was created as a military coalition against the sole adversary, the Soviet Union (Russia). NATO is an alliance whose purpose is to defend Europe from Russia. For all the latest geopolitical shifts in Europe and globally, NATO remains an anti-Russian military alliance, and the main reason for its existence is militarily defending European states (including the new NATO members) from Russia.”

Apparently Russia respects NATO’s military prowess and threat more than the alliance recognizes them. Its tepid military reaction to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine demonstrates how NATO is struggling to work out a doable course of action chiefly in view of the other eastern European countries’ fears of Russia invading them.

Pukhov noted Russia’s concerns about eastern European countries’ activities and their distrust of Moscow.

“The admission of the former Warsaw Pact members and the Baltic states to NATO has been a huge factor behind the instability in relations between Russia and NATO. All these new members regard Russia as their traditional historical enemy. To these countries, the greatest value of NATO is that the alliance is an anti-Russian military coalition. The main goal of the foreign policy of most East European states is to weaken Russia and undermine its influence. This is why these countries are constantly provoking a series of endless crises in relations with Russia in an effort to paralyze any cooperation between Russia and Western Europe.”

He said Russia reserves its greatest anxiety for Ukraine and Georgia, pointing out their attempts to accede to NATO are particularly irritating.

“As for the problem of Ukraine’s possible accession to NATO, the issue is a ticking nuclear time bomb for Russian-Western relations. Attempts to drag Ukraine into NATO would cause a tremendous pan-European military and political crisis. In addition, Ukraine itself would be plunged into an extremely deep domestic political crisis owing to the different cultural orientations and values of Ukrainians living in different parts of the country. The West underestimates the importance of the Ukrainian issue for Russia, and the role of Ukraine as a colossal destabilizing factor in Western-Russian relations in the immediate term. The West often imagines that Russia will be forced, one way or another, to succumb to the eventual Ukrainian accession to NATO. That is a dangerous delusion, which could lead to a catastrophic turn of events,” he wrote, adding that “the participation of Ukraine and Georgia in the western security architecture constitutes a red line for Russia.”

Russia’s National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation to 2020, adopted on May 19, 2009, foresees the development of its armed forces and military structure at least on par with the US.

“The main challenge of strengthening national defense in the medium term is the transition towards a qualitatively new profile for the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, while maintaining the potential of the strategic nuclear forces, by improving the organizational staff structure and system of territorially-based troops and forces, increasing the number of divisions at constant readiness, and likewise improving operations and combat training, as well as improving the organization of interaction among different troops and forces,” the document states.

These declarations were not made during Brezhnev or Khrushchev’s times but within the past couple of years, with Putin in power.

A Russian defense minister has insisted that Russia’s official military doctrine be rewritten to allow for a pre-emptive nuclear attack against the US and NATO, reported Interfax on Sept. 4. Russian Army Gen. Yury Yakubov said the doctrine, last revised in 2010, should be updated to classify the United States and other NATO countries as the “main enemy” of Russia. Yakubov, who is from the defense ministry’s inspector general’s office, also said it is time “to hash out the conditions under which Russia could carry out a pre-emptive strike with the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces.”

Russia’s principal newspaper, Pravda, warned on Nov. 12 that Russia has a “surprise” for the US if Washington continues to support Ukraine in today’s war with Russia. The article titled “Russia Prepares Nuclear Surprise for NATO,” cited a Sept. 1 State Department report that noted that US and Russia had reached parity in terms of deployed strategic nuclear weapons. The message of the article is evident: The readily deployable Russian nuclear arsenal is growing and now matches that of the US. So be careful where your tread, Washington.

US Gen. Philip Breedlove, known for recognizing Russia’s threat to Ukraine, eastern Europe and the world, said earlier this week that Russian forces “capable of being nuclear” are being moved to the Crimean peninsula, but NATO doesn't know if nuclear weapons are actually in place.

While the peace dividend of the perceived end of the Cold War has lulled Washington into believing that the time is ripe for a reset in relations with Russia, Moscow has continued apace to develop, expand and train its military, giving it the ability to invade any country, anytime.

Five days after the Winter Olympics concluded in Sochi, Russia invaded Crimea, occupied the peninsula and in the end annexed it. Was that a spur of the moment military action or one whose logistics demanded many months of preparations? That armed incursion launched the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014 and in the spring Russian mercenaries took to arms in eastern Ukraine, paving the way for a second invasion by Russian regular forces. Impromptu or planned in advance? Russia prepared for war while talking about peace and nuclear disarmament.

While Ukrainian soldiers, guardsmen and volunteer battalions have been defending their homeland in eastern Ukraine, Russia has been reminding the free world that it has the military capability to fly over its territories and approach their territorial waters with impunity.

The European Leadership Network (ELN) examined 39 incidents of military encounters between Russian planes and boats, and NATO forces and allies, in the last eight months and concluded that the “highly disturbing” violations of national airspace had caused several incidents where military confrontation or the loss of life was narrowly avoided.

Its report listed near-misses including violations of national airspace, emergency scrambles, narrowly avoided mid-air collisions, close encounters at sea and simulated bombing attacks stretching from the North Sea to the Baltic and Arctic regions and along the US coast.

The report rhetorically questioned whether President Vladimir Putin is merely flexing Russia’s military muscle to test NATO or simply increasing readiness amid the tensions that followed Putin’s annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine. Actually, it may be an irrelevant question because both points are tightly connected.

In the midst of all of this, the world’s disjointed leaders have agreed to sit at the same table with Vladimir Putin for the G20 meeting in Australia, where Ukrainians are planning mass demonstration to protest the Russian dictator’s presence on Australian soil. In advance of the meeting, British Foreign Minister David Cameron compared Russia with Nazi Germany and expressed hope that the world must learn the lessons of current history. Eloquently stated. But remember, Churchill didn’t meet with Hitler but leaders of the G19 will meet with Putin. Has morality changed that much since the end of World War II?

It seems that history will repeat itself for Ukraine and it will be abandoned or betrayed by the free world. Soon after independence was declared on August 24, 1991, Ukraine was arm twisted by everyone into surrendering its nuclear arsenal in exchange for security guarantees. Again, Ukraine lived up to its end of the deal but its partners didn’t. Ukraine has abided by the terms of the truce in the war with Russia but the invader hasn’t.

In a joint commentary on current affairs, former Presidents Leonid Kravchuk and Viktor Yushchenko noted: “Ukraine’s nuclear status was sacrificed for the sake of international stability and peace, and now the West is debating over whether it is safe to supply small arms Ukrainian defenders.”

Kevin Ryan, director of defense and intelligence projects at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, opined in The New York Times on Nov. 14 that the free world should forcefully confront Russia without regard for nuclear threats. “Until Russia removes its troops from eastern Ukraine and ceases its military support to pro-Russian separatists there, the United States should suspend any discussion on future arms reductions or cooperation on securing Russian nuclear materials and weapons.

“The US could continue to meet its obligations for nuclear weapons reductions under the New Start treaty. This would, for all practical purposes, end such cooperation. But the threat from Russian adventurism in Eastern Europe outweighs the potential threat from loose nuclear material.”
The Cold War is not over, Russia is still obnoxiously threatening the world, and the former captive nations are still scared of Russian terror. The more things change, the more they remain the same.

Anniversary of Toppling of Berlin Wall is Germany’s Day

The free world today observed the 25th anniversary of the toppling of the notorious Berlin Wall, a brick, mortar and steel structure that symbolized not merely communist dictatorship but also Russia’s subjugation of eastern European nations, including Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic countries, Poland, Czechoslovakia Hungary, Rumania and East Germany.

The Berlin Wall, a segment of the iron curtain that Winston Churchill belatedly recognized for what it is, signified a divide between the haves and have nots but not merely in economic terms. It was a visible, detested border between those in the West that enjoyed unbounded freedom and those in the East that were oppressed by Moscow.

Germans on both sides of the wall, imbued with spiritual strength and confidence, grabbed sledge hammers, and demolished the wall physically and ideologically.

The German nation probably found its inspiration from President Reagan’s words who, standing in the shadow of Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate, issued on June 12, 1987, a historic challenge to Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev:

“We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

That passage has outshined another one that Reagan uttered later in the same speech and presaged the spread of freedom:

“As I looked out a moment ago from the Reichstag, that embodiment of German unity, I noticed words crudely spray-painted upon the wall, perhaps by a young Berliner: ‘This wall will fall. Beliefs become reality.’ Yes, across Europe, this wall will fall. For it cannot withstand faith; it cannot withstand truth. The wall cannot withstand freedom.”

Indeed, the wall and the iron curtain fell. In quick succession, other eastern European countries followed suit and exited the Soviet Russian prison of nations, or as Reagan noted – the evil empire – until Ukraine finally did so two years later on August 24, 1991. The once captive peoples and their supporters in the free world were filled with hope that freedom and democracy will finally envelop nations that have for decades and centuries fought for their independence from Russia.

Unfortunately, this remarkable demonstration of a people’s will turned out to be an anniversary of Germany’s reunification rather than the ultimate defeat of Russian communism and oppression because Russia’s imperialism and repression continue today in a non-communist image. As I wrote at the launch of The Torn Curtain 1991 in February 2012, Russia in any form will attempt to restore the iron curtain of repression and subjugation.

Marking the anniversary, German Chancellor Angela Merkel alluded to this by observing that the toppling of the Berlin Wall “showed that we have the power to shape our destiny and make things better. That is the message of the fall of the Wall. It is directed at us in Germany, but also at others in Europe and the world, especially to people in Ukraine, in Syria, Iraq and other regions where human rights are threatened or violated.

"It was a victory of freedom over bondage and it’s a message of faith for today’s, and future, generations that can tear down the walls – the walls of dictators, violence and ideologies.”

Without diminishing Germany’s national victory, Europe and the world are not free of the threat of domination, dictators and violence. Russia has not slithered away from the global stage. Despite the free world’s hopes and wishes, Moscow has never accepted the departure of the captive nations, especially Ukraine, from its orbit. Russia may have only withdrawn to re-position itself militarily and politically for another attempt at restoring its empire and the inglorious prison of nations.

With every attempt by Kyiv to establish Ukraine as a respected, independent and sovereign member of the European community, Russia increased its efforts and evident threats to preserve its domination of Ukraine. It sabotaged elections and established its own governors but the nation continued to fight back.

In July 2013, while visiting Ukraine for the anniversary of the Christianity of so-called Rus, Putin did not conceal his displeasure with Ukraine’s proclaimed intention of signing the EU accession accords that would have sealed its independence from Moscow.

Amid of host of religious, predominantly Orthodox spiritual leaders, Putin on Saturday, July 27, urged Ukraine to join forces with Russia, cruelly saying Russians and Ukrainians were “one people.” He said the two majority Orthodox neighbors should further integrate economically.

“Intense competition is going on now in global markets, for global markets," Putin said after talks with President Viktor Yanukovych who did not oppose his Russian boss. “Only by joining forces can we be competitive and win in this rather tough competitive fight. We have every reason to believe that we can and must do it.”

However, he added deceivingly that Russia would “respect whatever choice the Ukrainian people and the Ukrainian state will make.”

Putin also stressed the bonds between both countries forged by a common history and what he called Russia and Ukraine’s “spiritual unity.”

“Together we went through great trials, tribulations and tragedies, together we built and defended the Great Rus,” Putin said following a meeting with Ukraine’s top Orthodox clergy. “All of us are spiritual successors of what happened here 1025 years ago. And in this sense we are certainly one people.”

That was Russia’s warning and pledge to re-subjugate Ukraine despite the defeat of communism – that sadly fell on deaf ears.

The Ukrainian people were undaunted in their attempts to sever the chains that bound them to Russia. When Yanukovych ultimately reneged on his pledge to sign the EU accords in the fall of 2013, the people took to the streets across Ukraine, toppled hundreds of Lenin monuments and ousted Yanukovych in what came to be known as the Euromaidan Revolution.

Russia did not give in to Ukraine’s national fervor. In February 2014, after the Sochi Winter Olympics, Moscow invaded southern Ukraine by way of Crimea and annexed the peninsula, and then invaded eastern Ukraine. The war rages until now.

Today, as the world commemorates the 25th anniversary of the toppling of the Berlin Wall that was erected by then Soviet Russia, contemporary Russia continues its war against Ukraine by sending additional waves of tanks, regular troops and mercenaries into eastern Ukraine.

Ukrainian military spokesman Col. Andriy Lysenko said today “Russia continues to send additional reinforcements, weapons, ammunition to the rebels.” Lysenko also said there’s a “high probability” Russia is preparing major provocations such as terrorist attacks or shelling that it can blame on Ukraine as a pretext to send “so-called peacekeepers” into rebel-held areas.

Some of the heaviest fighting in months erupted in and around the rebel stronghold of Donetsk early Sunday, hours after an unmarked column of weaponry and armed vehicles arrived in the eastern Ukrainian city. Despite declared ceasefires, Russia continues to violate every truce.

Eastern Europe fears that nothing will be able to stop Russia as it advances across Ukraine and into eastern Europe. Poland, among other former captive nations, has revised its defense strategy and reinforced its border with Ukraine.

Russia has stepped up military incursions over eastern Europe and in the seas around Europe. NATO is perplexed about what to do as a military alliance though some commanders, such as Gen. Philip Breedlove, commander, U.S. European Command, as well as the 17th Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) of NATO Allied Command Operations, have warned about the threat that Russia poses to European and global peace, security and stability. Their advice should be heeded.

A ghost of the cold war, Mikhail Gorbachev, has resurfaced in the past few days, not recalling the fall of the Berlin Wall but professing unbounded support for Putin’s war while cautioning the US and Europe that they are heading toward a new cold war because of their support for Ukraine. Gorbachev’s recent statements demonstrate that communist Soviet Russia is no different from federated Russia. Both have been and will continue to be aggressive and imperial by nature. Russia under any flag will pose a danger to the international community.

So as the French say, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Let’s raise a stein of German beer and say “prost” on the occasion of the reunification of Germany. But on the 25th anniversary of the toppling of Russia’s Berlin Wall, let’s look truth in the eyes and admit that the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014 proves that Russian colonialism was not defeated in 1989.