NEITHER OF THESE TWO AMERICAN ANAL SPHINCTERS SHOULD BE VOTED INTO OFFICE
- Any nation which does not totally and unconditionally subordinate its interests to Washington will be destroyed
- The basic policy of Washington remains 'containment' of Russia and preventing Eurasian integration
- Trump agrees with American policy, but wants to recoup America's strength before confronting Russia
Originally appeared at RIA Novosti. Translated by
Julia Rakhmetova
During
the last six months there have been discussions over whether Trump can
beat Clinton and how much Russia would benefit. I think Trump can win
but will not necessarily do so, and things could become even worse.
Trump
could win because he would defend US interests, not Russia’s. As
formulated by the ruling elite, America’s interests are absolutely
antagonistic to those of Russia.
Moscow can coexist
peacefully with Washington. But for Washington, peaceful coexistence is
nonsense. Its principle is: “if you don’t kill them, they will kill
you”.
What to Expect After the US Elections
On
this, the American elite is united. The split, expressed in the fight
between Clinton and Trump, – the first major one for the presidency
since Kennedy – is not about loving or hating Russia but about the best
way to destroy Russia.
Clinton represents a political group that believes the US can push Russia around.
Trump
represents the isolationists who claim that those who want to punish
Russia know the USA is no longer the world leader. They favor taking a
step back, ramping up means and only then attacking.
As a
matter of fact, Trump’s strategy toward Russia is the same one Putin
used toward the US. Having discovered that America’s resources are
limited and that Russia could win the resource race without a head-on
collision, Trump’s allies suggest shifting to a resource-saving
strategy.
But any deviation has its limits, beyond which
it becomes a disaster. There is a line that the USA will not cross,
even if Trump and the isolationists win. America will scale down the
global confrontation, focusing on dealing with domestic problems in
years to come.
The “thin red line” that the USA
will not cross until it goes for world hegemony – is a “cordon
sanitaire” between Russia and Europe, cutting Eurasia in half,
hindering its trade, economic and geopolitical integrity.
Likes and Dislikes
Only
ignorant people think the US is concerned about the overthrow of
Lukashenko in Belarus. Minsk still hasn’t dumped all the achievements of
socialism. They did in Russia, but does America like us any better?
You don’t have to be a brilliant politician to understand that even in
the event of mutually beneficial cooperation, the US will still detach
Belarus from Russia, without any resistance of the Belorussian elites.
But
let’s imagine that the US doesn’t like Lukashenko. Why did they
overthrow the pro-American regime of Yanukovich in Ukraine? The leaders
of the Party of Regions are telling the truth when they say that Ukraine
had a more anti-Russian policy under them. Besides, it was sustainable,
and didn’t tear the country apart by civil war. Did the US really not
understand what the takeover they financed would lead to? Is it
possible American presidents felt the same personal dislike toward
Yanukovich (and Kuchma before him)?
Assad was a
totally Westernized president, who carried out pro-Western reforms in
Syria, removed his troops from Lebanon, scaled down the confrontation
with Israel, obeying the USA in practically everything. What has he
done to displease them?
And Erdogan – whose country has
been a member of NATO for more than half a century, providing air bases,
supporting anti-government troops in Syria and storing nuclear bombs
that can be used only against Russia,– why did they try to overthrow
him?
What all these cases have in common is that
their leaders all respected US interests and followed its foreign
policy. But they weren’t ready to sacrifice their trade and economic
interests.
Transport Corridors
The
economic interests of all these states dictate pursuing trans-Eurasian
trade and economic integration from Lisbon to Kuala Lumpur.
The
economic interests of the USA dictate preventing trans-Eurasian ties,
imposing unprofitable agreements on trans- Pacific and trans-Atlantic
cooperation. But they fail to ‘persuade’ Russia, China and the EU to
stop trading with each other directly and do so through the intermediary
of the United States.
To stop Eurasian economic
integration, there must be an impassable barrier – a “cordon sanitaire”.
Aside from the Baltic States, that destroyed their transit potential
voluntarily, with their own hands, are there any states where the elites
don’t have problems with the US?
If you want to live
peacefully, destroy your transit potential and drown in poverty. Then
even NATO and the EU will accept you. If your economic well-being is
more important for you, the USA won’t capture your territory, they’ll
just set you on fire.
That’s why the same bloody
chaos is happening everywhere. It’s cheap and safe. There can’t be any
transit routes through the territory of a country where a permanent war
is going on.
Trump can officially refuse to support the
Nazi regime in Kiev, accept Assad’s right to continue ruling in Damascus
and even remove the anti-Russian sanctions. But US policy will still be
aimed at maintaining the “cordon sanitaire” along the western borders
of Russia, in the Baltics, Ukraine and Syria. They won’t leave either
Lukashenko or Erdogan alone.
Only one response is
possible: create so many transit routes that they can’t be closed with a
“cordon sanitaire”. Gas pipelines on the seabed, one’s own ports in the
Baltic and the Northeast Passage, keeping the Belorussian “window to
Europe” open, increasing the capabilities of the Kazakh transit route
make a“cordon sanitaire” meaningless.
But the soonest
these projects can be realized is between 2025 and 2030. Until then
countries will have to suffer. Their third option is to become Moscow’s
ally and hide under its nuclear umbrella, which US has thus far feared
to play with.
That’s why the “pro-Russian” Lukashenko
still rules, while the pro-American Kuchma (who came to power at the
same time) retired long ago.http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/trump-dangerous-russia-hillary/ri16295
No comments:
Post a Comment