Depending on which side of the story you believe, the crisis in Ukraine represents either an attempt by the Kremlin to realize territorial ambition and reassert Russian dominance in the Baltics by violating other countries’ sovereignty or it represents yet another attempt by Washington to prop up puppet governments with financial and military support in order to advance US foreign policy aims even if that means risking armed conflict. As is usually the case, the truth likely lies somewhere in the middle, although one has to admit that recent events seem to validate the Russian security council’s claims that ‘the armed forces are considered as the basis of US national security and military superiority is considered a major factor in the American world leadership.’ NATO war games along the Russian border and the recent House vote to provide Kiev with lethal aid seem to support Moscow’s assessment, and the dramaticcollapse of the Yemeni government is a vivid example of how things can go horribly awry when Washington hijacks the political process in order to install ‘friendly’ leaders in countries The White House deems ‘strategic’ for whatever reason.
That said, it’s in Russia’s best interest to keep geopolitical tensions just high enough to support oil prices (which works right up until other powerful nations decide to use energy prices as leverage in a bid to bring about regime change in Syria) and Moscow is itself famous for sabre rattling. Whatever the case, the conflict in Ukraine has made an impact on the lives of everyday Russians as Western sanctions squeeze the Russian economy. To let Soc Gen tell it however, the Russian people remain, for the most part, resolute in their support not only for President Putin, but for Russia’s position vis-a-vis the rebels in Ukraine.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on 03/29/2015.
Follow on Twitter
Recent Comments