Europe being Finlandized via Germany and France?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
I don't think you got the point Kuci, I was arguing that your vision of what it means to be significant is short-sighted. Militarily, Russia is more powerful than either France or China; geographically, they occupy a strategic position.

I'm not sure it's clear that the Russian Ground Forces would win against the PLA, or that it can project much (non-nuclear) power outside its rapidly diminishing sphere of influence.

[Fake Boris]

They can manipulate their poor neighbors with oil and pipelines, they can sell efficient weaponry to militias, and they can use their UNSC vote to counter antiproliferation efforts when it suits them.
So can France and China. The difference is they're willing to do it.

[lord of the mark]

i still fail to understand what threat a defensive system, based in Poland and Czecho, has on Russia. "damn, we want to annex south Ossetia, teh EEVIL Nato is standing behind Georgia, lets nuke Prague" Russians may be paranoid, but i have trouble believing their crazy.

[Cort Haus]

If NATO think that they cannot be attacked nooklarily, they are at liberty to offend Russia with conventional operations and expansion to Russia's borders. This is not universally considered as a good thing.

It was MAD that kept the cold war balance in Europe.

[Pekka]

LOTM, because then it gets easier to threaten someone with those missiles, when you have defense against them yourself.

The other side can't pressure the other side by saying if you attack us, then I guess we'll both have to destroy each other.

[Pekka]

Also, to understand Russia, it is simply not enough to look at the recent past. It's not only trying to have dreams of being a superpower once again.

You have to understand the Eurasian school of thought, and RUssia as part of it. That, and also the regional energy issues and future. You can't forget about these things when you think about Russia and the future.

[Kuciwalker]

I don't think they care because of any change in the nuclear dynamic - there is none, ABM doesn't even work. It represents the expansion of NATO into Russia's old sphere of influence.

[DanS]

US lashes out at Kremlin over missiles

By Daniel Dombey in Brussels, Hugh Williamson in Berlin and Neil Buckley in Moscow

Published: February 21 2007 19:26 | Last updated: February 21 2007 19:26

Tensions intensified on Wednesday over US plans for missile defence bases in Poland and the Czech Republic, as Washington called on Europe to take a tougher stance towards the Kremlin.

The Bush administration’s two top foreign policy officials lashed out at Moscow’s campaign against the bases, which Washington insists are aimed at possible threats from Iran rather than Russia.

Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, said the suggestion this week by Russia’s head of strategic rocket forces that Russia could target the two central European countries if they agreed to host the bases was “very unfortunate”.

She also dismissed comments by Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germany’s foreign minister, who said this week Moscow should have been consulted more about the sites, given their proximity to Russia’s borders.

Standing next to Mr Steinmeier at a press conference in Berlin, she said Washington had “10 formal contacts” with Russia on the plan since spring 2006, many at ministerial level.

Mr Steinmeier’s spokesman said the minister was aware that “technical talks” had taken place between Moscow and Washington, but said he had been warning against a return to the type of security stand-offs of the cold war era.

Separately in Brussels, Stephen Hadley, US national security adviser, emphasised Washington’s dismay at a speech this month in which Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, hit out at the missile defence plans and the US’s “unilateral” use of force.

“You heard a set of comments in which quite frankly we were disappointed,” Mr Hadley told the Financial Times and other European newspapers, between meetings with Nato ambassadors and Javier Solana, the European Union’s foreign policy chief.

“I think a lot of Europeans were disappointed and dismayed. And one of the things that Europeans need to do is they need to make that clear to Russia and they need to make that clear to President Putin.”

The EU has consistently struggled to forge a common line on Russia. Countries such as Poland, which are suspicious of the Kremlin’s intentions, are pitted against big western European states such as Germany and France, which are often keen to deepen ties with Moscow.

General Yuri Baluyevsky, Russia’s army chief of staff, yesterday told Rossiiskaya Gazeta, a government newspaper, the missile defence system “cannot be viewed as anything other than a substantial reconfiguration of the American military presence” in Europe.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007

[Kidlicious]

What the hell man?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Pekka
LOTM, because then it gets easier to threaten someone with those missiles, when you have defense against them yourself.

The other side can't pressure the other side by saying if you attack us, then I guess we'll both have to destroy each other.

Then shouldnt they be more threatened by anti-missile systems in the US, which actually has the ability to attack Russia, then in Poland or Czecho, which dont? Do they see the US as being deterred from attacking Russia by the prospect of the Russians hitting Prague? This makes no sense.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I don't think they care because of any change in the nuclear dynamic - there is none, ABM doesn't even work. It represents the expansion of NATO into Russia's old sphere of influence.

I too think that is the real point - they dont accept the results of the '89, that Poland and Czecho are sovereign countries and are NOT in their sphere of influence anymore. They want a "near abroad" that extends not just to Belarus and central asia, or even to Ukraine and Georgia, or even to the Baltics, but that encompasses central europe as well.

And the question, as DanS raised, is western europe going to accept that?

[Pekka]

Well, it's all part of NATO, so even though the cold war is over, the more these former satellites go the NATO way, the more Russia becomes powerless in it's former sphere. They still want to be able to pressure the old countries some, have a say in things, have influence.

So it's not just the defense itself, but that they are being left alone, and no one pays attention to their wishes. It's a show of 'we can't influence you anymore'. And also, the military power that could be projected in any scenario would have less meaning, should the satellites have good defense. They might actually not only just disobey what you say to them, but they might actually want something as well.

[DinoDoc]

They're still loved in Finland, right Pekka?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Pekka
Well, it's all part of NATO, so even though the cold war is over, the more these former satellites go the NATO way, the more Russia becomes powerless in it's former sphere.

Duh, and Britain became almost powerless in India after 1948(?). Live with it. Its one thing to claim an influence in Uzbekistan, or even in Ukraine. In central europe, their influence, never legitimate, was undone in '89. Period. Central Europe is part of Europe. Part of the West. No going back. If they want to reverse that, well thats kinda frightening, no?

[Pekka]

I don't think so .. I mean, we scored the highest 'russophobes' in the last official poll.