Entry details

Chirol
Author

Chirol

Date

September 19th, 2008

Tags

, ,

Comments

2 Comments so far.
Add yours.

Economist sums it up nicely

The Economist sums up Russia’s recent “reemergence” and the “new Cold War” nicely:

“Russian forces are not modern. Some of their weapons date back to the 1960s and 1970s. But that does not mean they cannot kill you,” says Pavel Felgenhauer, a Russian defence writer for Novaya Gazeta, a newspaper. The Russians may not be a match for even a medium-sized Western army, say experts, but they are good enough to scare the poor, post-Soviet states in the “near abroad”.

In the words of a senior American official, “the war in Georgia does not show the Russians have greater military capability, but it demonstrates a greater willingness to use force.” NATO will have to reassess its assumptions about Russia, albeit cautiously to “avoid creating a self-fulfilling prophecy”, as the official puts it.

The main threats to the West now are Russia’s manipulation of oil and gas exports, its diplomatic spoiling tactics, and its dalliances with Iran, Syria and Venezuela. The danger of a direct attack by Russia is remote. But the indirect threat of its more advanced weapons being sold to such potential Western foes is a growing worry.

It’s about time someone wrote a more balanced and informed piece which doesn’t rely on Cold War cliches

Comments to this entry

Tuor
September 19, 2008
6:14 pm
One suspects the will to fight is also an important factor.
tdaxp
September 19, 2008
7:18 pm
Well said.

Russia is a sylvan Saudi Arabia, or a cold Venezuela. Not to be laughed at. But hardly a country one could conceivable fight a cold war against. (In the same way that a mutligenerational struggle against Portugal makes no sense.)