Russia’s leading scholar of nuclear arms Alexey Arbatov has crossed swords with one of the most renowned pro-Kremlin experts on geopolitics, Dmitri Trenin, on whether and how nuclear arms control can be revived

Russia Matters, 6/3/24

Russia’s leading scholar of nuclear arms Alexey Arbatov has crossed swords with one of the most renowned pro-Kremlin experts on geopolitics, Dmitri Trenin, on whether and how nuclear arms control can be revived, while also debating whether the tenets of Russia’s nuclear deterrence should evolve. In a commentary for Interfax, Arbatov describes Russia’s current approach as defensive deterrence, but also acknowledges the calls for a transition to offensive deterrence made by what he has described, tongue-in-cheek, perhaps, as “independent strategists,” and which would be employed to support the country’s military offensives. In his commentary, Arbatov also calls for “restoring arms control, renovating the negotiation process and expanding them from bilateral to various multilateral formats and new weapons systems.” In his turn, Trenin writes in his commentary for Interfax that “arms control is dead and will not be revived.” Moreover, Trenin calls for “an active strategy of nuclear deterrence that would lower the threshold for use of nuclear weapons that is too high today.” Instead of authorizing use of nuclear weapons over “a threat to the very existence of the state,” Russian strategic documents should authorize such use over “a threat to the vital interests of the country,” according to Trenin. Implementing Trenin’s suggestion would require revising not only the language on the use of nuclear weapons in the 2014 Military Doctrine and 2020 Basic Principles of State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence, but also the language on national interests in, for instance, Russia’s 2021 National Security Strategy, which describes national interests such as “maintaining… harmony” and in “conservation of natural resources.”* 

Dmitry Trenin: A massive transformation is taking place in Russia, and the West is blind to it

by Dmitry Trenin, RT, 5/13/24

Two and a half years into its war against the West in Ukraine, Russia certainly finds itself on a course toward a new sense of itself.

This trend actually predated the military operation but has been powerfully intensified as a result. Since February 2022, Russians have lived in a wholly new reality. For the first time since 1945, the country is really at war, with bitter fighting ongoing along a 2,000-kilometer front line, and not too far from Moscow. Belgorod, a provincial center near the Ukrainian border, is continuously subjected to deadly missile and drone attacks from Kiev’s forces.

Occasionally, Ukrainian drones reach far deeper inland. Yet, Moscow and other big cities continue as if there were no war, and (almost) no Western sanctions either. Streets are full of people and shopping malls and supermarkets offer the usual abundance of goods and food items. One could conclude that Moscow and Belgorod are a tale of two countries, that Russians have managed to live simultaneously both in wartime and peacetime.

This would be a wrong conclusion. Even the part of the country that ostensibly lives ‘in peace’ is markedly different from what it was before the Ukraine conflict began. The central focus of post-Soviet Russia – money – has not been eliminated, of course, but has certainly lost its unquestionable dominance. When many people – not only soldiers but civilians, too – are getting killed, other, non-material values are coming back. Patriotism, reviled and derided in the wake of the Soviet Union’s collapse, is re-emerging in force. In the absence of fresh mobilization, hundreds of thousands of those who sign contracts with the military are motivated by a desire to help the country. Not just by what they can get from it.

Russian popular culture is shedding – slowly, perhaps, but steadily – the habit of imitating what’s hot in the West. Instead, the traditions of Russian literature, including poetry, film, music are being revived and developed. A spike in domestic tourism has opened to ordinary Russians the treasures of their own country – until recently neglected, as a thirst for travel abroad was quenched. (Foreign travel is still available, but difficult logistics make reaching other parts of Europe far less easy than before).

Politically, there is no opposition to speak of against the current system. Almost all of its former figureheads are abroad, and Alexey Navalny has died in prison. A lot of former cultural icons who, after February 2022, decided to emigrate to Israel, Western Europe, or elsewhere, are fast becoming yesterday’s celebrities, as the country moves on. Those Russian journalists and activists who criticize Russia from afar are increasingly losing touch with their previous audiences, and are saddled with accusations of serving the interests of countries fighting Russia in the proxy war in Ukraine. By contrast, nearly two-thirds of young men who left Russia in 2022 for fear of being mobilized have returned, some of them quite embittered by their experience abroad.

Putin’s statement about the need for a new national elite, and his promotion of war veterans as the core of that elite, is more of an intention than a real plan at this stage, but the Russian elite is definitely going through a massive turnover. Many liberal tycoons essentially no longer belong to Russia; their desire to keep their assets in the West has ended up separating them from their native country.

Those who stayed in Russia know that yachts in the Med, villas on the Cote d’Azur, and mansions in London are no longer available to them, or at least no longer safe to keep. Within Russia, a new model of a mid-level businessperson is emerging: one who combines money with social engagement (not the ESG model), and who builds his/her future inside the country.

Russian political culture is returning to its fundamentals. Unlike that of the West, but somewhat similar to the East – it is based on the model of a family. There is order, and there is a hierarchy; rights are balanced by responsibilities; the state is not a necessary evil but the principal public good and the top societal value. Politics, in the Western sense of a constant, often no-holds-barred competition, is viewed as self-serving and destructive; instead, those who are entrusted with being at the helm of the state are expected to arbitrate, to ensure harmony of various interests, etc. Of course, this is an ideal rather than reality. In reality things are more complex and complicated, but the traditional political culture, at its core, is alive and well, and the last 30 to 40 years, while hugely instructive and impactful, have not overturned it.

Russian attitudes to the West are also complex. There is appreciation of Western classical and modern (but not so much post-modern) culture, the arts and technology, and of living standards to an extent. Recently, the previously unadulterated positive image of the West as a society has been spoiled by the aggressive promotion of LGBTQ values, of cancel culture, and the like. What has also changed is the view of Western policies, politics and especially politicians, which have lost the respect most Russians once had for them. The view of the West as Russia’s hereditary adversary has again gained prominence – not primarily because of Kremlin propaganda, but as a function of the West’s own policies, from providing Ukraine with weapons that kill Russian soldiers and civilians, to sanctions which in many ways are indiscriminate, to attempts to cancel Russian culture or to bar Russians from world sports. This hasn’t resulted in Russians viewing individual Westerners as enemies, but the political/media West is widely seen here as a house of adversaries.

There is a clear need for a set of guiding ideas about “who we are,” “where we are in this world” and “where we are going.” However, the word ‘ideology’ is too closely linked in many people’s mind with the rigidity of Soviet Marxism-Leninism. Whatever finally emerges will probably be built on the values-led foundation of traditional religions, starting with Russian Orthodoxy, and will include elements from our past, including the pre-Petrine, imperial, and Soviet periods. The current confrontation with the West makes it imperative that some kind of a new ideological concept finally emerges, in which sovereignty and patriotism, law and justice take a central role. Western propaganda pejoratively refers to it as “Putinism” but, for most Russians, it may be simply described as “Russia’s way.”

Of course, there are people unhappy with policies that have deprived them of certain opportunities. Particularly if those people’s interests are largely in money and individual wealth. Those in this group who have not gone abroad are sitting quietly, harbor misgivings and privately hope that somehow, at whatever cost to others, the “good old days” come back. They are likely to be disappointed. As for the changes within the elite, Putin is aiming to infuse fresh blood and vigor into the system.

It doesn’t look like some sort of ‘purge’ is coming. The changes, nonetheless, will be substantial, given the age factor. Most of the current incumbents in the top places are in their early 70s. Within the next six to ten years these positions will go to younger people. Ensuring that Putin’s legacy lives on is a major task for the Kremlin. Succession is not merely an issue of who eventually emerges in the top position, but what kind of ‘ruling generation’ comes in.

John Varoli: Russia Won’t Take Biden’s Bait to Start WWIII

A more positive take from Varoli. I hope he’s right. – Natylie

By John Varoli, Substack, 6/3/24

Last week, the White House stirred up a media frenzy about allowing Kiev to use U.S. weapons to attack sites “inside Russia”, though ostensibly only regarding the HIMARS short-range missile launcher system to hit targets in the Belgorod Region.

What’s behind this decision? Strategically it changes little. So, most likely it’s part of a media campaign to boost Biden’s dismal ratings, to deflect from NATO’s battlefield defeats and to galvanize public opinion in an election year amid the White House’s failed crusade against Russia.

On May 30, the New York Times wrote: “President Biden, in a major shift pressed by his advisers and key allies, has authorized Ukraine to conduct limited strikes inside Russia with American-made weapons, opening what could well be a new chapter in the war for Ukraine. Mr. Biden’s decision appears to mark the first time that an American president has allowed limited military responses on artillery, missile bases and command centers inside the borders of a nuclear-armed adversary.”

No, there won’t be any “new chapter in the war for Ukraine”. As often, the NYT dutifully labors on behalf of the White House to create the illusion that NATO/ Kiev will be able to turn the tide against Russia and then ethnically cleanse the Donbass and Crimea regions of its Russian-speaking population.

The stark reality is that over the past 12 months, the U.S., UK, France and several other NATO states have been helping Kiev to bomb Russian cities, military bases and industrial infrastructure. For example, in summer 2023 the UK began to supply Kiev with Storm Shadow missiles as part of efforts to terrorize south Russian cities.

On May 30, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg admitted that several NATO states “never imposed any” restrictions on the use of their weapons, by which he meant the UK, France and Czech Republic. The latter’s “Vampire” multiple rocket launcher has often been used in Kiev’s terrorist attacks against Russia’s Belgorod Region that have killed many people at family events and city markets.

Meanwhile, for the past 18 months the U.S. Army’s HIMARS system has been used by Kiev to commit numerous war crimes throughout Donbass, especially in the city of Donetsk, where public markets and other civilian areas are often targeted, leaving many dozens dead and injured.

Kiev’s missile and drone attacks over the past year were only possible thanks to U.S. support, primarily real-time battlefield intelligence from Pentagon satellites and Reaper drones operating over the Black Sea. Also, earlier this year the NYT revealed that the CIA plays a direct role in attacks against Russia, which is why the U.S. is now widely considered to be a leading sponsor of terrorism.

Many American experts have erroneously described the recent White House decision to attack “inside Russia” as a watershed that could lead to World War 3. I disagree. Russia won’t take the bait because it’s already winning the war. Time is on Russia’s side. Zelensky’s unpopular regime is collapsing, and there’s also the possibility that all of NATO will go down with him.

Moscow’s reaction to the May 30th announcement to strike “inside Russia” has been relatively mild. Why? First, Russia’s powerful air defenses have been able to deal successfully with most U.S./ NATO missiles and drones; and in general there have been many reports of NATO missiles’ overall poor technical performance, especially when faced with Russian jamming.

Second, Moscow realizes that the White House has a wider plan to ignite the world on fire and kill as many people as possible. Thus, President Putin will continue to exercise the restraint he has shown over the ten years of the Donbass conflict. Moscow only responds by punishing NATO’s offensive capabilities inside Ukraine, never hitting infrastructure and command centers inside NATO, even though international law gives Moscow that right.

Putin’s response last week sounded menacing but don’t expect any threat to be carried out: “Officials from NATO countries, especially the smaller European countries, should be fully aware of what is at stake. Before talking about ‘striking deep into Russian territory,’ they should remember that their countries are small and densely populated. This unending escalation can lead to serious consequences.”

NATO certainly won’t heed that message. In February 2022, Putin warned the West to stay out of Ukraine, but that was quickly ignored. Then in September 2022 Russia’s Foreign Ministry said that if the U.S. supplied Kiev with longer-range missiles, it would cross a “red line” and become “a party to the conflict”. Again, NATO crossed the red line with impunity.

Then, in October 2023, Putin labeled U.S. supplies to Kiev of long-range tactical ballistic missiles (ATACMs) “another mistake by the U.S.” But no punishment was ever carried out, further giving the West reason to believe that Russia is weak. Moscow truly has a credibility problem.

The White House is goading Russia, hoping Moscow will make a rash step — such as a direct attack on a NATO country — in order to justify the start of World War 3. Such a war would play into the hands of the failed Biden presidency, which eagerly seeks a substantial reason to call off the presidential election in November and to decree martial law at home. World War 3 would certainly be that reason.

The U.S. and its Kiev proxy will continue to try to escalate the conflict, sending tens of thousands of forcefully conscripted young men to die in Zelensky’s meat grinder. As someone who worked with Ukraine for nearly 15 years, I’m speechless at how that nation has been brainwashed to die for a blatant fraud and con artist as Zelensky.

The war in Ukraine and all major events of the past five years (such as Covid 19) leads one to conclude that modern western liberalism is a death cult — developing deadly biological weapons, inciting wars across the globe, and subjugating freedom-loving nations that won’t bow to its ‘progressive’ gods. This destructive ideology has brought the world to the edge of a nuclear war in its obsession for global domination to forge its Orwellian “rules-based order”.

History, however, is clear — totalitarian ideologies that seek global domination eventually fail and collapse through internal and external pressures. Internally, the U.S. is plunging into chaos as a feeble and demented president tries in vain to stamp out the last flames of American freedom; internationally the Global South looks to Russia, China and India in a bid to stop the manic ambitions of the West.

We are witnessing one of the most epic confrontations in human history. Truly a glorious time to be alive.

RT: Zelensky’s illegitimacy, NATO ‘bulls**t’ & Russia’s ‘asymmetric’ response: Key takeaways from Putin’s foreign press briefing

RT, 6/6/24

Russian President Vladimir Putin has offered an overview of how he sees the Ukraine conflict’s roots and where the crisis may be headed, as well as the prospects of peace and speculation about a full-fledged war with NATO, as he spent over three hours answering a wide range of questions from representatives of international news agencies on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) on Wednesday.

1. Zelensky’s questionable legitimacy

Putin argued that the crisis stems from a US-backed coup that overthrew Kiev’s elected government in 2014. “Everyone believes that Russia started the war in Ukraine. But no one – I want to emphasize this – no one in the West, in Europe, wants to remember how this tragedy began. It began with a coup in Ukraine – an unconstitutional coup d’etat.”

Zelensky ‘seized power’ in Ukraine – PutinREAD MORE: Zelensky ‘seized power’ in Ukraine – Putin

Now Vladimir Zelensky’s legitimacy has also come under question, as according to Ukrainian laws his powers were supposed to be transferred to the country’s parliament after his term as president ended last month, Putin argued. He suggested that Western backers may “tolerate” and keep Zelensky around long enough to force through more unpopular policies – like lowering the conscription age all the way down to 18 – then oust him, possibly as early as next spring. “They have several candidates to replace him.”

2. ‘Bulls**t’ NATO claims

Asked about NATO’s preparations to defend against a possible Russian “invasion,” Putin suggested that Western governments are spreading absurd and false fears to help maintain their global hegemony.

“Look, someone has imagined that Russia wants to attack NATO,” he said. “Have you gone completely insane? Are you as thick as this table? Who came up with this nonsense, this bulls**t?”

3. ‘Asymmetric’ measures loom

Putin called out the US and other NATO members for supplying long-range missiles targeting deep into Russian territory. He warned that such escalations could backfire for the West as Moscow weighs its options.

“If someone deems it possible to supply such weapons to the war zone, to strike our territory…, why shouldn’t we supply similar weapons to those regions of the world where they will be used against sensitive sites of these countries?” Putin asked. “We can respond asymmetrically. We will give it a thought.”

4. How the conflict could end

The administration of US President Joe Biden could quickly stop the fighting in Ukraine by halting the flow of weapons to Kiev, Putin said. He told journalists that he had received a letter from Biden regarding the crisis, and he replied by arguing that the bloodshed would stop within two to three months if munitions shipments are cut off.

Russian leaders have repeatedly claimed that Ukraine’s Western military backers are merely prolonging the conflict without changing its outcome.

5. US election offers little hope

Putin said Russia has no expectation of serious policy changes resulting from this year’s US presidential election. Even if Biden loses to Republican challenger Donald Trump, relations with Moscow will likely remain antagonistic. “Basically, we don’t care (who wins),” the Russian leader said.

Biden’s administration is tearing down the US political system by using the courts to prosecute Trump, Putin added. “They are burning themselves from the inside.” In any case, he said, the new US administration would have to abandon Washington’s focus on “global liberalism” and hegemony – instead prioritizing the interests of the American people – to enable a major shift in foreign policy.

“No one is interested in Ukraine in the United States,” Putin said. “They are interested in the greatness of the United States. They are not fighting for Ukraine; they are fighting for their leadership in the world. They do not want Russia to be successful, to prevail, because they think it will be damaging for the leadership of the United States.”

6. Germany lost sovereignty

Putin also painted a bleak picture of Moscow’s relationship with Germany. Berlin’s supplying of tanks and missiles to Kiev has destroyed Russo-German relations, he said, and providing long-range weapons for strikes on Russian territory could lead to “very serious problems.”

Germany has allowed the US to devastate its economy by blowing up the Nord Stream natural gas pipelines and imposing failed sanctions against Russia, Putin claimed. The US also controls the flow of information in Germany, he added. “No one is trying to protect German interests. Germany is not sovereign, but there are Germans, and someone has to think of their interests.”