Thread: Russia's Long Game

Originally Posted by zraver

I sit here thinking and pondering Russia's moves in support of Tehran, pipeline disputes arms sales, and other moves that seem to run counter to world opinion.

It is my humble opinion that like proffesional advertisers Russia doesnt do anything by accident. I am becoming more and more convinced that Russian arms and technology sales often to states opposed to the west are now being deliberately used to destabalize energy markets and tie up the US Military.

First item on the agenda is in order to drive up oil and gas prices adding more hard currency to its cash reserves to fuel its continued economic recovery.

The second reason and in the end more important reason would seem to be to keep the US military tied up in Iraq as a means of sidelining the bulk of NATO's combat power. Arms sales to China despite the Chinese threat to Russia also fits inside of this by increasing US focus and allotment of reseources on China and away from Europe.

We all know Russia is not happy about the expansion of NATO which has not only removed Russia's historic buffer areas, but turned them into potentially hostile areas with out firing a shot. NATO's expansion has also blocked any Russian dreams of re-establishing their hegemony.

With a declining population and a widening gap in the technology feild direct competition ala Soviet style is not an attractie to a state that for the first time ever is finally making more money from trade than Vodka sales. This only leaves an indirect approach to what Russia sees as a strategic dilemma: how to counter NATO and the US.

We can argue until we are blue in the face about historic Russia imperialism and the West's need to create it's own buffer verses the Bear. But this new NATO buffer has seemingly unhinged the Russian mind and planted the seeds of a new cold war. This time it will not be amssed soviet tanks, instead it will be Russian weapons in the hands of others and backed by massive amounts of petro dollars.

I will be looking for confirmation as Russia begins to sign very lucrative supply contracts with oldEurope but with obvious defense related riders attached, while the new Europe and former imperial possesionbs are subjected to various forms of blackmail, black ops (like race relations) and movements and coercion aimed at forcing these former imperial territories back into the Russian orbit.

~zraver

"It is my humble opinion that like proffesional advertisers Russia doesnt do anything by accident. I am becoming more and more convinced that Russian arms and technology sales often to states opposed to the west are now being deliberately used to destabalize energy markets and tie up the US Military."

Actually you are wrong about this one. Russia doesn't sell weapons to these countries cause they are favoring their goals, but because on the free market there is rule for supply and demand. If there are countries that need weapons one that can deliver them will deliver and make profit. Weapons are goods just as any other goods, I don't see why they would be treated differently than let's say tennis shoes or vegetables...Russian weapons have one huge advantage over the western weapon systems, and that advantage is that they are fairly simple and easy to use. That makes them ideal product for countries that are not technologically developed. So not only that they are making money by selling weapons to those countries, they are also securing themselves from those countries and that is done in two ways. First of all, they are making "friendly" gesture on one hand and on the other hand by selling arms to those countries they know what kind of arms their possible enemies have, in case some of those countries turn against Russia. Fact that most of those countries are opposed to the west doesn't make any difference it just adds points to the demand factor.

"We all know Russia is not happy about the expansion of NATO which has not only removed Russia's historic buffer areas, but turned them into potentially hostile areas with out firing a shot. NATO's expansion has also blocked any Russian dreams of re-establishing their hegemony.

With a declining population and a widening gap in the technology feild direct competition ala Soviet style is not an attractie to a state that for the first time ever is finally making more money from trade than Vodka sales."
Let me get this one cleared:
1.Their former enemy is on their borders
2.Their strategic position has been narrowed
3.Their human resources are declining (aging population)
4.They are falling behind with technological progress.

How do you think they should feel about these things? Turn their heads away and act like nothing has happened? These are strategic problems and these are not small problems.

The fact that the Europe will become dependent of Russian energy resources is something that is usual and expected. If they (Europeans) are so afraid of Russia why they didn't developed alternative energy resources when they are so smart and technologically advanced?
I'm not defending Russia or attacking west, I used to live on both sides and all that I learned is that there is both good and bad on both sides. Things are not entirely black and white, there is a lot of gray in between.

Russia has (in my opinion) always considered it buisness............if it ties up US troops, that's a bonus.

In terms of Russia ONLY selling to keep the US busy, I really can't imagine that being the case (though with Putin anything could be possible).

Originally Posted by crooks

Russia has (in my opinion) always considered it buisness............if it ties up US troops, that's a bonus.

In terms of Russia ONLY selling to keep the US busy, I really can't imagine that being the case (though with Putin anything could be possible).

Exactly.
It is business and it will stay that way, always...

Russia, the US, UK, France and Sweden are competing to sell India modern fighters.

I don't think there is any major strategic reasons behind any of the nations offers.

That Russian equipment is preferred by third world countries is not because there is any technological deficiency in the user countries. That is not the reason.

The reason is that the Russian equipment is simple and is effective, even though they look very crude. The greatest advantage is that they are practically maintenance free and are 'soldier proof' (capable of absorbing rugged and rough handling)!

Guys I am not talking about genral run of the mill equipment ut weapons systems designed for a confrontation with the US. Like modern subs and destroyers, anti-ship missiels and advanced SAMs to nations like Iran and China where the US has very real concerns.

Originally Posted by zraver

Guys I am not talking about genral run of the mill equipment ut weapons systems designed for a confrontation with the US. Like modern subs and destroyers, anti-ship missiels and advanced SAMs to nations like Iran and China where the US has very real concerns.

Try to see things from their perspective. If you are Iran or China and have US carrier battle group in your back yard, armed with high tech weaponry what would you buy? An Ak-47 isn't a good weapon of choice against tomahawk missile or B-2.

I am not blaming them, I am looking at what Russia gets out of it besides cash. After all arming a militant islmic state that supported chechen rebels and arming the Chinese who now have million sof national sinside of Russia's borders not thw wisest possible move in some scenerios. But arming them to keep oil prices high, NATO occupied and America tied up doe smake sense on a great many levels.