Russia passes the point of no return
After a series of January meetings between Russian diplomats and representatives of the United States, NATO and the OSCE, on the 21st, a meeting of the heads of diplomatic departments of Russia and the United States was held in Geneva. The meeting was initiated by the American side. As was stated by the head of the State Department, Antony Blinken, he was "unclear what is or is not the central demand of Russia", so it was necessary to clarify the details. In my opinion, this meeting showed the full nature of the current Russian-American relations and their prospects.
At the beginning of the meeting, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov confirmed that the meeting is being held in order for the United States to prepare specific responses to Russia's proposals set out earlier in two draft treaties. He also noted that he had read the document prepared by the State Department "Fact vs. Fiction: Russian Disinformation on Ukraine", expressing the hope that some of the officials present were not busy preparing this document, but focused on preparing the current meeting.
I advise the reader to read this document in order to understand that the qualifications of US State Department officials are too low to create an information campaign and comply with the laws of elementary logic.
Lavrov went on to mention Blinken's words that he does not expect a breakthrough at this meeting. Expressing similar expectations, Lavrov said that Russia wants to hear concrete answers to its proposals in line with the OSCE commitments, when no country should strengthen its security at the expense of another country.
Blinken began his speech by saying that the current meeting is in line with ongoing efforts to de-escalate tensions due to Russian aggression against Ukraine. While the United States seeks dialogue with Russia, it and its allies are ready to respond quickly and harshly to Russia's aggression against Kiev. Blinken said that during the discussion he wants to convey to Russia this common position of partners and fundamental principles of behaviour.
In my opinion, this rhetoric set the whole tone of the meeting. Therefore, for domestic readers, it is necessary to reveal this unfamiliar narrative, which has long been served by the United States to its domestic audience and the audience of their allies. The last time Blinken revealed this narrative was during his visit to Germany on January 20:
"Russia has repeatedly turned away from agreements that have kept the peace across the continent for decades. And it continues to take aim at NATO, a defensive, voluntary alliance that protects nearly a billion people across Europe and North America, and at the governing principles of international peace and security that we all have a stake in defending. Those principles, established in the wake of two world wars and a cold war, reject the right of one country to change the borders of another by force; to dictate to another the policies it pursues or the choices it makes, including with whom to associate; or to exert a sphere of influence that would subjugate sovereign neighbours to its will.
To allow Russia to violate those principles with impunity would drag us all back to a much more dangerous and unstable time, when this continent and this city were divided in two, separated by no man’s lands, patrolled by soldiers, with the threat of all-out war hanging over everyone’s heads. It would also send a message to others around the world that these principles are expendable, and that, too, would have catastrophic results.
That’s why the United States and our allies and partners in Europe have been so focused on what’s happening in Ukraine. It’s bigger than a conflict between two countries. It’s bigger than Russia and NATO. It’s a crisis with global consequences, and it requires global attention and action.”
Further, Blinken stressed that if it were only about Russia's security, then it would be possible to reach an agreement with it, just as it was done earlier. But Russia refuses to engage in dialogue because it is not about its security, but about Ukraine's sovereignty, and Russia's refusal to recognise the post-Cold War rule of Europe.
Blinken argues that even in the face of Russia's provocative actions, the United States is trying to find a diplomatic solution to the issue, since everyone understands the consequences if Russia refuses to follow the path of diplomacy. At the same time, the United States, addressing the world community, is trying to show Russia what consequences it will face if it seeks conflict and violates the established rules.
After these words, Blinken accused Russia of annexing Crimea, inciting war in Donbass and the current humanitarian catastrophe, as well as continuing attempts to destabilise the ruling regime in Kiev. In his opinion, now Russia is ready to go even further, and as a result of the new aggression, the number of victims will exceed all previous figures.
Blinken explained that one should not be surprised if Russia arranges a provocation to justify military intervention, since it has already done this. The basis for the invasion is Russian President Vladimir Putin's perception that Ukraine is not a sovereign country, as he told US President George W. Bush in 2008.
This is not just about an invasion, but about the existence of Ukraine as a sovereign state. This applies not only to Ukraine, Blinken explained, Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, in Moldova, Russia now retains troops and weapons against the will of the leadership of this country.
Blinken said that if Russia invades and occupies Ukraine, it will continue to turn neighbouring countries into puppet states, suppressing the sparks of democracy. This, in turn, will lead to the destruction of the old rules and encourage other countries to do what they want. That is why the international community should be concerned about what is happening in Ukraine.
At the end of his speech, Blinken accused Russia of violating the obligations previously concluded with NATO, and then said that Vladimir Putin probably wants to return to the Cold War era, and if he decides to do so, the Western countries will meet him with the same determination and unity that past generations had, "promoting freedom”.
The seriousness of the current situation was emphasised in an interview with the Financial Times by Deputy Head of the State Department Victoria Nuland: “Remember that this is an aggression in Europe, and this is changing the map of Europe. So you know, none of us wants to ask for our citizens or our companies to make sacrifices, but sometimes national and international security requires that,” she said, commenting on 18 options for sanctions against Russia.
Ins, Nuland emphasised the danger of the current situation and a possible provocation by Russia in order to justify the invasion of Ukraine. At the same time, Nuland sees the current negotiations with Russia as an opportunity to resolve issues related to limiting the deployment of intermediate-range missiles in Europe and regulating the conduct of military exercises.
The journalist's attempt to take the position of Russia and assess NATO as an aggressive organisation that goes on the offensive, and has already launched an attack in the Balkans, did not affect Nuland, since, in her opinion, NATO is only a defensive alliance. At the end of the interview, the journalist asked the question "what will be the human cost?" to the developing conflict. Nuland replied that the human losses would obviously be huge, primarily for Ukrainians, but also for Russians, and waves of refugees would flow to Europe.
Amid the news that the United States has allowed three Baltic states to supply American weapons to Ukraine and the Czech Republic is ready to supply it with ammunition, a more important signal to aggravate is the report of Bloomberg that the United States is considering options for evacuating the families of diplomats from Kiev.
The fact is that after the death of the US Ambassador to Libya, in 2012, a loud scandal broke out, which largely cost the then head of the State Department, Hillary Clinton, the presidential chair. Diplomats are the elite of the nation, and their lives are not trifled with in the United States, so this message from Bloomberg should be taken seriously by the prospects for the development of the situation.
The current Russian negotiating position has not changed after the meeting between the deputy foreign ministers of Russia and the United States. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov summed up Russia's position on January 13:
"The main problem is the United States and its NATO allies under any guise, for any reason ... we are not ready to meet our key demands for non-expansion of NATO, curtailing the alliance's infrastructure and returning it to its borders as of 1997. And, of course, on the subject of legally binding guarantees of non-deployment of relevant systems in the immediate vicinity of our borders.
On January 21, the Russian Foreign Ministry's response to questions from the media said that the Russian proposals on security guarantees are "about the withdrawal of foreign forces, equipment and weapons and other steps to return to the configuration as of 1997 on the territory of countries that were not members of NATO at the specified date. These include both Bulgaria and Romania."
Following the meeting on January 21, the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement:
"It has been clearly conveyed to Blinken that further disregard for the legitimate concerns of the Russian Federation, primarily related to the ongoing military development of the territory of Ukraine by the United States and its NATO allies against the background of the large-scale deployment of alliance forces and assets near our borders, will have the most serious consequences. This can be avoided if Washington responds positively to our draft agreements on security guarantees, which we expect to receive a written article-by-article response from the American side next week.
Special attention was paid to the internal Ukrainian conflict. They stressed the need for Kiev to implement the ‘Package of Measures’ as soon as possible and in full format, including establishing direct dialogue with the authorities of the LPR and DPR."
However, at the current moment, the United States cannot make concessions to Russia, not only because of the "open door principle in NATO", but also because of the internal political situation in the United States.
Against the backdrop of low approval ratings, US President Joe Biden must prove himself as a tough politician, as the failure to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan has undermined his credibility both inside the US and on the international stage. During a press conference on January 20, Joe Biden threatened disastrous sanctions against Russia. However, he mentioned that in the event of a "minor incursion" by Russia, US allies will have to dispute their response options.
This statement caused a serious scandal among American politicians and US allies. Congressmen from the Republican Party stated that Biden gave Putin the green light to cross the border of Ukraine. The White House immediately began to make excuses for the situation, explaining that Joe Biden's signal was unequivocal: any crossing of the Ukrainian border by Russian troops will receive a tough response from the United States and its allies.
The next day, during a press conference on infrastructure, Joe Biden was still forced to correct the situation: "I have been absolutely clear with President Putin, he has no misunderstanding. If any, any assembled Russian units move across the Ukrainian border that is an invasion," Biden said. "But there is no doubt, let there be no doubt at all, that if Putin makes this choice, Russia will pay a heavy price"
On January 8, even before the start of a series of negotiations with representatives of the United States, NATO and the OSCE, the RUSSTRAT report "Global trends and challenges for Russia in 2022" predicted that the conditional "hawks" of the US Democratic Party will be able to provoke a conflict situation between the US and Russia, pursuing their own domestic political goals.
In addition, Britain is playing on their side, which, by inflating the conflict between the United States and Russia over Ukraine, wants to weaken continental Europe. It is no coincidence that on January 19, the British Foreign Office called the situation around Ukraine a foreign policy priority. Bloomberg reported that British Foreign Office staff were told to be ready to go into "crisis mode" as soon as possible due to the possible escalation of the situation around Ukraine.
Therefore, there is a high probability of provocation in Ukraine, which will allow the West to declare Russian aggression. However, to a greater extent, this will be an informational provocation, since with a full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, the latter will not be saved. The reasons for the West's lack of desire to fight with Russia are well described in the RUSSTRAT article "Why no one will come to war with Russia."
At the same time, since Joe Biden needs unambiguously positive PR in the alleged "victory over the aggressor", it was predicted that the West would need to maximise the heat of hysteria about a possible Russian attack on Ukraine, so that the layman would have no doubts about the culprit of what happened. Now we are at this stage of development of the situation, the White House even indicates a provocation/attack interval from mid-January to mid-February of this year, and the Pentagon echoes these statements. By the way, experts of the RUSSTRAT Institute already parsed this situation on January 15, 2022:
"The scenario of a US military provocation against Russia using a reusable rubber product of the Ukraine type is as simple as a steamed turnip and has already been repeatedly used by the Anglo-Saxons. In this regard, Psaki's information about the alleged impending Russian invasion of Ukraine (interesting dates - from mid-January to mid-February - if anything, already mid-January) serves only as the final finishing touch of the US provocation being prepared.
Suffice it to recall the Summer Olympics in China in 2008 - Georgia's aggression against South Ossetia took place on August 8 - the opening day of the Olympics. Or take the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, which began on February 7. By that time, Maidan was already burning with might and main, and on the night of February 21-22, just at the end of the Olympics on February 23, there was a coup d'etat that was supposed to push Russia's triumph out of the world information agenda. Information from War Gonzo that Kiev will urgently distribute weapons to the territorial battalions fully confirms this conclusion.
This also explains the motives of the Russian leadership's position that the Americans should respond quickly to Russian security proposals - Moscow wants to complete the situation with negotiations (yes-yes, no-no) before the start of the Beijing Olympics on February 4. Because the provocation of the Americans in Ukraine is possible just from the period from 2-3 days before the start of the Olympics to the end of the first week, and this is approximately from February 1 to 11. We don't have much time left - 2 weeks."
As Putin said at the December big press conference in 2021: "About guarantees and whether something will depend on the progress of negotiations. Our actions will depend not on the progress of negotiations, but on the unconditional provision of Russia's security today and in the historical future." Thus, Russia did not expect to endlessly agree to new rules of the game with the West, but will play by its own rules.
Many people do not believe in such a development of events, but they do not take into account the storm of the current economic crisis, the crisis of the world system, which is already falling apart, and a little later will bury many "failed states" that are unprepared for this. Russia, on the other hand, came prepared for this storm. And now, like a ship, it turns around and stands with its nose to the incoming waves and wind. The point of no return is passed. And if they try to talk to us in the language of guns, the enemy will be defeated, the victory will be ours.