Strategy of big problems

« Back

Strategy of big problems 10.01.2018 14:25



The administration of Donald Trump published an updated version of the US National Security Strategy. According to this document, global external threats to Americans come from Moscow and Beijing: "China and Russia are challenging the power, influence and interests of the US, trying to undermine American security and prosperity. They are determined to make their economies less free and fair, build up military power, control information to suppress society and expand their influence".

Moscow's reaction to the new version of the US National Security Strategy was expected. Thus, Dmitry Peskov, the presidential press secretary, reported on the "imperial nature" of this document and the persistent rejection of the multipolar world by Washington. In addition, he stressed that the Strategy sees "modest positive moments" - the willingness to cooperate with Russia where it is in the interest of the Americans. For its part, "Moscow is also looking for cooperation with the US where it benefits us, and as far as our American colleagues are ready to go".


What does this mean for the world and for us?


In fact, Washington does not want to proceed from the fact that the world is gradually becoming multipolar. At the same time, as the White House is convinced, in the economic sphere the confrontation of the United States with China is increasingly growing, and in the military-political sphere - with Russia. Of course, the latter does not lead to war, given that Russia has a commensurate with the US nuclear missile potential. Instead, Moscow is constantly provoked, then hindering the flights of its combat aviation in Syria, and then reproaching the violation of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles. Or, for example, by modernizing American tactical weapons in Europe, after which the efficiency of its combat use is increased three to fourfold. At the same time, Washington is exerting powerful pressure on its European allies to contain the alleged "aggressive actions" of the Russian leadership.

At the same time, it is forgotten that it was the Americans who initiated the power version of the change of power in Ukraine in February 2014 and actively contributed only in recent years to destabilize the situation in Iraq, Libya and Syria.

At present, serious interaction between Russia and the United States is possible only in one area - the fight against international terrorism. "An ideal example" of such cooperation was the prevention of terrorist attacks in St. Petersburg by exchanging information through the special services. There is experience of military cooperation between Moscow and Washington in Syria. Thus, in Manbije and the canton of Afrin, Russian and American troops created buffer zones between Syrian Kurds and pro-Turkish armed groups. And in the province of Deraa, it was Russia and the USA that organized the southern zone of de-escalation. However, such interaction is extremely limited and sometimes accompanied by mutual accusations of failure to fulfill its obligations.

Mainly through the fault of the United States, there is no cooperation between Moscow and Washington to resolve the Libyan, Afghan and Yemeni crises. Moreover, in the face of increasing tension on the Korean peninsula, we are limited to bilateral consultations instead of joint efforts to resume the six-party talks on the settlement of the North Korean nuclear problem. But it could not be otherwise under the conditions when the United States, under any pretext, is imposing new financial and economic sanctions against Russia, and their European allies, through the EU, extend the current ones.

Of course, the new version of the US National Security Strategy identifies two more types of threats for Americans and their allies: first, the "dictatorial regimes" of the DPRK and Iran; second, the terrorist organizations Islamic State and Al-Qaida (banned in the Russian Federation). Maybe this is so, but for some reason, Germany, France and even Britain are in favor of maintaining the Joint Comprehensive Action Plan (the so-called "nuclear deal with Iran"). And where is the Islamic state, if President Donald Trump has already announced victory over him?

Thus, in the new version of the US National Security Strategy, the Trump Administration did not introduce a new one. In fact, she only continued the policy of the Obama administration to contain Russia and China. But how does this help solve global problems and strengthen security for Americans? It seems that this strategy will create more problems for the US than will help to solve them.