Threats of sanctions: U.S. containment and Russian breakout
Author: Lord Tan
Source: Yuyuan Tan Tian
WeChat platform editor: Zhou Yue
At 3:18 p.m. on January 13, 2022, in the White House press room, reporters were already seated, waiting for the spokesperson.
The OSCE meeting has just concluded, and people are wondering what choices Russia, the United States and NATO will make after three dialogues.
In his speech, U.S. National Security Adviser Sullivan repeatedly mentioned the word "ready":
The United States is prepared for any contingency, any possibility, including Russia's "invasion" of Ukraine.
But the question is, is it really Russia that creates tension?
In the past week, Russia has engaged in intensive consultations with the West.
On the 10th, the United States and Russia dialogue was held; on the 12th, the NATO-Russia Council meeting was held; on the 13th, the OSCE meeting was held. None of the three dialogues made any substantive progress and ended inconclusive.
One of the core differences lies in NATO's eastward expansion.
In 1999, NATO completed its first post-Cold War eastward expansion, taking in Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary. While NATO increased its 750-kilometer border with Russia, it also pushed the defensive front 700 kilometers eastward at once.
In 2004, NATO's second eastward expansion absorbed seven countries, including the three Baltic states, and the "buffer zone" of russia's strategic location in northwestern Russia disappeared, and the passage to the Atlantic Ocean was blocked.
More importantly, the deployment of strategic weapons here can cover Russia's main cities, and Russia has lost its "strategic depth".
Now, NATO is frequently signaling the absorption of Ukraine's accession. If it can deploy a missile system in Ukraine, it could attack Moscow in 4 to 5 minutes.
Every eastward expansion will bring new friction to Russia and NATO members, and as long as you look at history, you will find that every time you expand eastward, there are other people behind it.
In 1989, the recently appointed US President George H.W. Bush said to NATO allies in a slightly "fleshy" tone, "The European problem is the problem of the United States, and the hope and desire of Europe are our hopes and aspirations. ”
But the hot face stuck to the cold ass. Western European countries, especially France, said that Europe mainly refers to Western European countries or EU member states, and the United States has no half-cent relationship. The French president also said Europe would separate from the United States, especially on security issues.
Two very different views actually respond to the same question - clear-eyed people can see that the world structure is undergoing major changes, as a military alliance NATO, where to go?
Europe can do without NATO, but the United States cannot do without.
For the United States, the expansion of NATO is the expansion of American interests and influence. As originally envisioned, the "NATO model" could be replicated on any continent.
The United States is full of thoughts about the projection of its own influence on the world, but has never considered the future of NATO from the perspective of overall European security. European countries want security and stability.
For European countries, Russia is the key to the stability of its security structure, and only by strengthening relations with Russia can peace and stability on the European continent be ensured. At that time, Russia also had the idea of joining NATO.
Russia and European countries hit it off, and there was nothing for the United States to do. Of course, the United States does not want to see this situation.
In 1993, Foreign Affairs magazine published an article titled "Building a New NATO." It is mentioned that the United States should build a new security structure in Europe, the core task of which is to fill the "security vacuum" in Central and Eastern Europe - NATO's eastward expansion.
On the one hand, it pushes NATO's eastward expansion and pushes aggressively toward Russia, while on the other hand, it fanns the flames in Russia.
To provoke Russia's discontent, the United States also pushed the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank to add additional options to Russia's financial aid program. Russia can only get the money after a series of tax reforms.
The move of the United States has also made the wind direction of "westward" in Russia begin to change.
In 1999, NATO officially absorbed Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. Joining is more than just a ritual. Under the agreement, it also means that 100 percent of Poland's army is under NATO command, 90 percent of the Czech army is under NATO command, and Hungary puts most of its troops under NATO command.
The United States is waiting for Russia's reaction. That year, Russia welcomed a new president, Putin. Not long after he took office, the Russian government did not apply for another loan from the International Monetary Fund. The next road is up to Russia itself.
On December 31, 1999, Yeltsin resigned as President of Russia and announced that Putin would take his place
Putin is a pragmatic man, he understands that in the current Russia, the domestic goals should be much higher than the international goals, and in foreign relations, we must also learn to avoid confrontation.
It's just that there are some things, the trees want to be quiet, and the wind doesn't stop.
After taking office, Putin is sincere in improving Russia's relations with NATO.
In 2000, in his first meeting with the then NATO secretary-general, Putin also asked when NATO was ready to invite Russia to join.
With the efforts of Russia, two years later, NATO and Russia established the NATO-Russia Council. In the Council, Russia and NATO countries, together, have joint decision-making power on issues such as counter-terrorism.
Despite their differences, Russia and NATO have reached a fairly broad consensus, with both sides agreeing that new threats such as terrorism are tasks that need to be accomplished together.
In this way, the momentum of NATO's eastward expansion will slow down, which makes the United States unable to sit still. Turning around, George W. Bush supported the membership of NATO in Europe's emerging democracies from the Baltic sea to the Black Sea on the grounds that NATO should become a "more global" organization capable of dealing with new threats such as terrorism.
In discussions within NATO, the United States sent a deputy secretary of state, but western European countries did not send the same officials. They are not enthusiastic about this round of NATO expansion – Russia and European countries share a common interest in energy issues, and both sides recognize the need to ensure stability in Russia's neighbors.
Faced with such a situation, the United States also proposed to enhance NATO's political function and promote "democracy, free markets and regional stability."
Thus began the color revolution that swept through Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan and other countries have fallen into chaos, behind which there is a figure of the United States.
In the face of the Incitement of the United States at home, Putin tit-for-tat and unabashedly announced to the outside world: Russia's strategy toward the United States must first make itself strong, and Russia can re-energize itself on the international stage through the energy field.
Putin piloted the Tu-160 strategic bomber, which he had mentioned, a diplomatic protest ten thousand times, not as good as the wings of a strategic bomber flapping once
Under Putin's rule, Russia's politics have stabilized and its economy is growing rapidly — in 2006 alone, the country's poverty population was cut in half. The country is abandoning its old negativity and getting back on the road.
Seeing that Russia is not on the set, the United States has stepped up its efforts. In 2007, the United States invited the former Prime Minister of Ukraine to visit the United States. Immediately after, the U.S. Congress passed a $30 million grant bill to provide military assistance to five Eastern European countries, including Georgia and Ukraine, to help them meet the criteria for nato membership.
Saying that NATO is expanding eastward, the essence is still to use the Cold War mentality to encircle Russia.
But NATO's European countries do not want to follow in the footsteps of the United States. At a NATO leaders' dinner, reporters recorded that at least seven countries were lining up against George W. Bush.
When the United States carried out "color revolutions" everywhere against Russia, some NATO countries led by France and Germany were busy building natural gas pipelines with Russia, and some cooperated with Russia on issues such as counter-terrorism and regional stability.
After all, the American set of thinking is outdated, and NATO also needs to look forward.
In 2010, the European countries in NATO were preparing to drastically cut their defense budgets – since following the United States to Afghanistan, NATO has paid a heavy price, fighting terrorism for many years, but "the more anti-terrorist".
As NATO allies struggle to make a difficult withdrawal in the Afghan capital Kabul, critics have slammed NATO's mission in Afghanistan as a "complete failure"
The actions of these countries aroused the alarm of Victoria Newland. At the time, she was the U.S. Special Representative for Conventional Armed Forces in Europe — and for a long time, an important role of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe was to contain Russia.
In 2014, when the Ukraine crisis erupted, Newland, who was already sitting as assistant secretary of state for European affairs, was ready to provoke contradictions between Russia and NATO.
But soon after, a piece of Newland's audio was exposed on the Internet, and she listened to the voice a little out of control, and even burst into a foul mouth to scold Europe for being weak on this issue.
NATO allies and the United States have shared the same dream. Trump, on the other hand, has put this disagreement on the table.
In July 2018, at the NATO summit in Brussels, Belgium, then-US President Trump "fired" at his allies.
Trump, as a businessman, has calculated the pros and cons very clearly. Germany buys oil and gas from Russia for billions of dollars, billions of dollars, and as for this alliance, Europe is eager to spend too much.
At that year's G7 summit, multinational leaders "besieged" Trump
Macron's later "brain death" of NATO unveiled the fundamental problem with the alliance – that it does not serve the interests of Europeans.
NATO is only the NATO of the Americans, not the Europeans. People are scattered, the road ahead is confused, and NATO is once again encountering an existential crisis. In order to "save" NATO, the way the United States makes cards and plays cards is boring and similar.
Trump's negative attitude provoked a violent reaction from the US Congress. It was also the year that a mechanism called the Senate NATO Observer Group was revived. Its appearance means that the "Russian threat" rhetoric is coming back.
Today, smoke from eastern Ukraine is rising again. After the card in Afghanistan failed once and for all last year, the topic of Ukraine's membership in NATO was once again provoked — the few chips left in the hands of the United States.
Both sides have deployed a large number of military personnel and equipment in the border area, the United States continues to play up russia's "invasion" threat, the risk of gun fire is on the verge of erupting, and Russia has engaged in intensive dialogue with the United States and NATO.
During the dialogue, Russia demanded that NATO restore its deployment to the state it was in 1997.
Hearing "1997," Biden's memory was awakened. That year, the Senate NATO Observer Group was born from time to time, and the co-chair of the group was Senator Biden.
Russian diplomats love to use one word — the "genetic code." Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov once pointed out that "it is difficult for the United States and other countries to get rid of the Cold War mentality, and the genetic code established to fight against an enemy still exists." ”
America is still that America. Still thinking of "uniting" NATO allies and containing Russia in a way that shapes the enemy. However, NATO is not a monolith, some countries have clearly seen the true face of the United States, the so-called "containment", but the "rotten tail building" that leaks wind on all sides.
Russia, which takes its own path of development, is also using these "gaps" to complete the breakthrough.
This time, Russia has also issued "two lists" — a draft treaty on security guarantees, one for the United States and one for NATO. The content of the draft is basically russia's position that has been openly and repeatedly emphasized, the bottom line issue, and not giving in.
The world is no longer that world.
*Disclaimer: This article only represents the personal views of the author and does not represent the position of this official account
Think tank of the digital economy
Political Science and International Relations Forum
In order to better serve the construction of digital China, serve the construction of the "Belt and Road", and strengthen theoretical exchanges and practical exchanges in the process of digital economy construction. Experts and scholars from China's digital economy and the "Belt and Road" construction have established a digital economy think tank to contribute to the construction of digital China. Wei Jianguo, former vice minister of the Ministry of Commerce, served as honorary president, and well-known young scholars Huang Rihan and Chu Yin led the way. The Political Science and International Relations Forum is a dedicated platform under the umbrella of the Digital Economy Think Tank.