Putin Agonistes:
Missile Defense will not be Deployed
Global Research,
December 20, 2007
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7659

It's been a lot of hard work, but Russian President Vladimir Putin
has finally achieved his goal. He's cleaned up the mess left behind
by Yeltsin, put together a strong and thriving economy, and restored
Russia to a place of honor among the community of nations.
His legacy has already been written. He's the man who rebuilt
Russia. The last thing he wants now, is a pointless
confrontation with the United States. But how can it be avoided? He
understands Washington's long-range plans for
Russia and he is taking necessary steps to preempt them. He
is familiar with the heavyweights of US foreign policy, like
Zbigniew Brzezinski, and has undoubtedly read his master-plan
for Central Asia, “The Grand Chessboard”. Brzezinski's recent
article in Foreign Affairs, (A publication of the Council on Foreign
Relations) “A Geostrategy for Eurasia” summarizes his views on
America's future involvement in the region:
“America's emergence as the
sole global superpower now makes an integrated and comprehensive
strategy for Eurasia imperative.
Eurasia is home to most of the
world's politically assertive and dynamic states. All the historical
pretenders to global power originated in Eurasia. The world's most
populous aspirants to regional hegemony,
China and
India, are in Eurasia, as are all the potential political or
economic challengers to American primacy. ... Eurasia accounts for
75 percent of the world's population, 60 percent of its GNP, and 75
percent of its energy resources. Collectively, Eurasia's potential
power overshadows even America's.
Eurasia is the world's axial
supercontinent. A power that dominated Eurasia would exercise
decisive influence over two of the world's three most economically
productive regions, Western
Europe and East
Asia. A glance at the map also suggests that a country
dominant in Eurasia would almost automatically control the
Middle East and
Africa. With Eurasia now serving as the decisive geopolitical
chessboard, it no longer suffices to fashion one policy for
Europe and another for
Asia. What happens with the distribution of power on the
Eurasian landmass will be of decisive importance to America's global
primacy and historical legacy.”
So, there it is. The US is
moving into the neighborhood and has no intention of leaving. The
war on terror is a fraud; it merely conceals the fact that Bush is
sprinkling military bases throughout Central Asia and surrounding
Russia in the process. Brzezinski sees this as a “strategic
imperative”. It doesn't matter what Putin thinks. According to
Brzezinski “NATO
enlargement should move forward in deliberate stages” . The US must
make sure “that no state or combination of states gains the ability
to expel the United States or even diminish its decisive role”.
This isn't new. Putin has known
for some time what Bush is up to and he's been as accommodating as
possible. After all, his real passion is putting
Russia back on its feet and improving the lives of its
citizens. That will have to change now that Bush has decided to
install a “Missile Defense” system in Eastern Europe. Putin will
have to devote more time to blocking America's plans. The new system
will upset the basic balance of power between the nuclear rivals and
force Putin to raise the stakes. A confrontation is brewing whether
Putin wants it or not. The system cannot be deployed. Period. Putin
must now do whatever he is necessary to remove a direct threat to
Russia's national security. That is the primary obligation of every
leader and he will not shirk his responsibility.
Putin is an elusive character;
neither boastful nor arrogant. It's clear now that western pundits
mistook his reserved, quiet manner as a sign of superficiality or
lack of resolve. They were wrong. They underestimated the former-KGB
Colonel. Putin is bright and tenacious and he has a vision for his
country. He sees
Russia as a key player in the new century; an energy
powerhouse that can control its own destiny. He doesn't plan to get
bogged down in avoidable conflicts if possible. He's focused on
development not war; plowshares not swords. He's also fiercely
nationalistic; a Russian who puts Russia first.
But Putin is a realist and he
knows that the US will not leave Eurasia without a fight. He's read
the US National Security Strategy and he understands the ideological
foundation for America's “unipolar” world model. The NSS is an
unambiguous declaration of war against any nation that claims the
right to to control its own resources or defend its own sovereignty
against US interests. The NSS implies that nations' are required to
open their markets to western multinationals and follow directives
from Washington or accept a place on Bush's “enemies list”. There's
no middle ground. You are with us or with the terrorists. The NSS
also entitles the United States to unilaterally wage aggressive
warfare against any state or group that is perceived to be a
potential threat to Washington's imperial ambitions. These so-called
“preemptive” wars are carried out under the rubric of the “war on
terror” which provides the justification for torture, abduction,
ethnic cleansing and massive civilian casualties.
US National Security Strategy
articulates in black and white what many critics had been saying for
years; the United States owns the world and everyone else is just a
guest.
Putin knows that there's no way
to reconcile this doctrine with his own aspirations for an
independent
Russia but, so far, a clash has been averted.
He also knows that Bush is
flanked by a band of fanatics and militarists who plan to weaken
Russia, install an American stooge (like Georgia and
Afghanistan) and divide the country into four regions. This strategy
is clearly presented in forward-planning documents that have been
drawn up in Washington think tanks that chart the course for US
world domination. Brzezinski is quite candid about this in his
article in Foreign Affairs:
“Given (Russia's) size and
diversity, a decentralized political system and free-market
economics would be most likely to unleash the creative potential of
the Russian people and Russia's vast natural resources. A loosely
confederated
Russia -- composed of a European
Russia, a Siberian Republic, and a Far Eastern Republic --
would also find it easier to cultivate closer economic relations
with its neighbors. Each of the confederated entitles would be able
to tap its local creative potential, stifled for centuries by
Moscow's heavy bureaucratic hand. In turn, a decentralized
Russia would be less susceptible to imperial mobilization.” (Zbigniew
Brzezinski,“A Geostrategy for Eurasia”)
Partition is a common theme in
imperial planning whether its called apartheid in
Israel, federalizing in
Iraq, “limited independence” in
Kosovo, or “loose confederation” in
Russia. It's all the same. Divide and rule; undermine
nationalism by destroying the underlying culture and balkanizing the
territory. This isn't new. What is amazing, is that Bush's plan is
going forward despite 7 years of uninterrupted foreign policy
failures. Hubris and self-delusion have a longer shelf-life than
anyone could have imagined.
Putin is surrounded by ex-KGB
hardliners who have warned him that America cannot be trusted. They
have watched while the US has steadily moved into the former-Soviet
satellites, pushed
NATO to Russia's borders, and precipitated regime change via
“color coded” revolutions. They point to Chechen war where US
intelligence services trained Chechen insurgents through their ISI
surrogates in
Pakistan—teaching them how to conduct guerrilla operations in
a critical region that provides
Russia with access to the western shores of the resource-rich
Caspian Basin.
-
Michel Chossudovsky has
done some excellent research on this little-known period of
Russian history. In his article “The Anglo-American Military
Axis”, he says:
“U.S. covert support to the
two main Chechen rebel groups (through
Pakistan’s ISI) was known to the Russian government and
military. However, it had previously never been made public or
raised at the diplomatic level. In November 1999, the Russian
Defense Minister, Igor Sergueyev, formally accused Washington of
supporting the Chechen rebels. Following a meeting held behind
closed doors with
Russia’s military high command, Sergueyev declared that:
'The national interests of
the United States require that the military conflict in the
Caucasus [Chechnya]
be a fire, provoked as a result of outside forces", while adding
that "the West’s policy constitutes a challenge launched to
Russia with the ultimate aim of weakening her
international position and of excluding her from geo-strategic
areas.'”
In the wake of the 1999
Chechen war, a new "National Security Doctrine" was formulated and
signed into law by Acting
President Vladimir Putin, in early 2000. Barely acknowledged
by the international media, a critical shift in East-West relations
had occurred. The document reasserted the building of a strong
Russian State, the concurrent growth of the Military, as well as the
reintroduction of State controls over foreign capital....The
document carefully spelled out what it described as " fundamental
threats" to
Russia’s national security and sovereignty. More
specifically, it referred to "the strengthening of
military-political blocs and alliances" [namely GUUAM], as well as
to "NATO’s
eastward expansion" while underscoring "the possible emergence of
foreign military bases and major military presences in the immediate
proximity of Russian borders." (Michel Chossudovsky, “The
Anglo-American Military Axis”, Global Research)
That's right; there's been a
low-grade secret war going on between
Russia and the US for over a decade although it is rarely
discussed in diplomatic circles. The war in
Chechnya is probably less about “succession” and
independence, than it is about foreign intervention and imperial
overreach.
The same rule applies to the
controversy surrounding
Kosovo. The Bush administration and its EU clients are trying
to fragment
Serbia by supporting an initiative for
Kosovo “limited independence”.
But why “limited”?
It's because Bush knows that
the resolution has no chance of passing the UN Security Council, so
the only way to circumvent international law is by issuing a
unilateral edict that is promoted in the media as “independence”. By
this same standard,
Abraham Lincoln should have granted Jefferson Davis “limited
independence” and avoided the Civil War altogether.
Author Irina Lebedeva
reveals the real motives behind the administration's actions on
Kosovo in her article “USA-Russia: Hitting the same Gate, or
playing the same game?”
“The North Atlantic alliance (The US and its EU allies) documents
indicate that the bloc aims at the “Balkanization” of the
post-Soviet space by way of overtaking influence in the territories
of the currently frozen conflicts and their follow-up
internalization along the Yugoslavian lines are set down in black
and white. For example, a special report titled “The New North
Atlantic Strategy for the Black Sea Region”, prepared by the German
Marshall Fund of the United States on the occasion of the
NATO summit, already refers to Black Sea and South Caucasus
(Transcaucasia) as a “new Euro-Atlantic borderland plagued by
Soviet-legacy conflicts.” And the “region of frozen conflicts is
evolving into a functional aggregate on the new border of an
enlarging West.”
Azerbaijan and Georgia in tandem, the report notes, provide a
unique transit corridor for Caspian energy to
Europe, as well as an irreplaceable corridor for American-led
and
NATO to bases and operation theatres in Central Asia and the
Greater
Middle East.”
Once again, divide and rule;
this time writ large for an entire region that is being arbitrarily
redrawn to meet the needs of mega-corporations that want to secure
“transit corridors for Caspian energy to
Europe”. The new Great Game. Brzezinski has called this area
a critical “land-bridge” to Eurasia. Others refer to it as a “new
Euro-Atlantic borderland”. Whatever one calls it; it is a good
illustration of how bloodthirsty Washington mandarins carve up the
world to suit their own geopolitical objectives.
Putin has seen enough and
he's now moving swiftly to counter US incursions in the region. He's
not going to wait until the neocon fantasists affix a bullseye to
his back and take aim. In the last few weeks he has withdrawn
Russia from the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE)
and is threatening to redeploy his troops and heavy weaponry to
Russia's western-most borders. The move does nothing to enhance
Russian security, but it will arouse public concern in
Europe and perhaps ignite a backlash against Bush's Missile
Defense system.
Russian Navy Admiral
Vladimir Masorin also announced this week that
Russia will move part of its fleet to Syrian ports where “it
will maintain a permanent presence in the Mediterranean. Israeli
leaders are in a panic over the announcement claiming that the move
will disrupt their “electronic surveillance and air defense centers”
thus threatening their national security. Putin intends to go ahead
with the plan regardless. Dredging has already begun in the port of
Tartus and a dock is being built in the Syrian port of
Latakia.
Also, Russian officials are
investigating the possibility of building military bases in
Serbia and have been invited to discuss the issue with
leaders in the Serbian Nationalist Radical Party (SRS) The
prospective dialogue is clearly designed to dissuade the US from
pursuing its present policy towards Kosovo.
Russia also delivered its first shipment of nuclear fuel to
Iran this week which means that the controversial 1,000 watt
nuclear plant at
Bushehr could be fully operational within three months.
Adding insult to injury, Iranian officials announced on Monday their
plans to build a second plant in defiance of US orders to halt its
nuclear activities.
Also, on Monday, “Russia
test-launched a new intercontinental ballistic missile part of a
system that can outperform any anti-missile system likely to be
deployed” according to Reuters. “The missile was launched from the
Tula nuclear-powered submarine in the Barents Sea in the Arctic.”
“The military hardware now
on our weapons, and those that will appear in the next few years,
will enable our missiles to outperform any anti-missile system,
including future systems," Col.-Gen Nikolai Solovtsov was quoted as
telling journalists.” (Reuters)
Bush's Missile Defense
system has restarted the nuclear arms race. Welcome to the new
Cold War.
Finally,
Russia Chief of Staff, General Yuri Balyevsky warned:
“A possible launch of a
US interceptor missile from Central
Europe may provoke a counterattack from intercontinental
ballistic missiles....If we suppose that
Iran wants to strike the United States , then interceptor
missiles which would be launched from
Poland will fly towards
Russia and the shape and flight trajectory are very
similar to ICBMs” (Novosti Russian News Agency)
Balyevsky's scenario of an
“accidental” World War 3 is more likely than ever now that Bush is
pressing ahead with his plans for Missile Defense. Russia's
automated missile warning systems can be triggered automatically
when foreign missiles enter Russian air space. Its a dangerous game
and potentially fatal every living thing on the planet.
To great extent, the
American people have no idea of the reckless policy that is being
carried out in their name. The gravity of the proposed Missile
Defense system has been virtually ignored by the media and Russia's
protests have been dismissed as trivial. But hostilities are
steadily growing, military forces and weaponry are being put into
place, and the stage is set for a major conflagration. This is every
bit as serious as the Cuban Missile Crisis, only this time Russia
cannot afford to stand down.
Putin will not allow the
system to be deployed even if he has to remove it through force of
arms. It is a direct threat to Russia's national security. We would
expect no different from our own leaders.
Global Research Articles by Mike Whitney
Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of
the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for
Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are
not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be
displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or
other forms including commercial internet sites, contact:
crgeditor@yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.ca
contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been
specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such
material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use"
in an effort to advance a better understanding of political,
economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to
use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must
request permission from the copyright owner.
For media inquiries:
crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright Mike Whitney, Global Research, 2007
The url address of this article is:
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7659
Privacy Policy
© Copyright
2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
Web site engine by
Polygraphx Multimedia
© Copyright 2005-2007
Article
Reproduced From:
www.globalresearch.ca |