Western media about the "tsarist" gift of the US President to Russia, the commotion over the royal visit, the Russian-Iranian clash and the final refusal of Moscow from Ukraine
The visit of King Salman of Saudi Arabia, led by a huge delegation of politicians, diplomats and businessmen, to Moscow last week stirred up Western media. The arrival of the monarch of an influential Middle Eastern power in the Russian capital is called both "a new era in relations between the two countries" and "an indicator of the failure of US foreign policy." As you know, the media, including those in the "stronghold of democracy and freedom", are often the spokesperson for the interests of certain influential political, business and other circles. The general concern about the negotiations between Moscow and Riyadh, which is clearly visible in the publications of the Western mass media, clearly speaks of the general nervousness prevailing in the elite circles there. The disintegrating American-centric world, focused on Washington, is obviouslycan no longer keep even its closest allies in unconditional obedience, who are forced to take into account the rapidly changing global political reality. The Bell of Russia presents another collection of interesting materials in the Western media over the past week.
For example, the influential American edition of The Washington Post published an article entitled “Why Washington Will Follow the Visit of the Saudi King to Moscow” by the columnist Adam Taylor. According to him, the significance and solemnity of the event is quite understandable, since this is the first official visit of a Saudi king to Russia in its entire history. "He will be closely followed, and primarily in the United States," he emphasizes.
The author notes that the United States has been the Kingdom's main ally for more than 70 years, while Riyadh has established relations with Moscow only in the post-Soviet period. “It took time for the warming between the two countries to start. President Vladimir Putin visited Saudi Arabia back in 2007, but the Arabian monarch did not return a visit to Russia. Now times have changed, the observer writes, adding that both countries have decided to reconsider their relationship in the face of a revision of the leading role of the United States in the world.
What does the rapprochement between Moscow and Riyadh mean for the United States, Taylor asks. And then he answers: it is not yet clear. “The visit of the Saudi monarch coincided with another exacerbation of Russian-American contradictions. And despite the fact that US President Donald Trump seems to be imbued with sympathy for Saudi Arabia, making it the target of his first overseas visit as head of the White House, the Arabian monarchy cannot ignore Washington's uncertainty in Middle East politics,”the observer said.
According to him, the dialogue with Vladimir Putin and the building of a new architecture of bilateral relations will help the Saudi monarchy compensate for the losses it suffered by betting on Donald Trump. "The head of the White House seriously disappointed Riyadh in the issue with Qatar, not fully supporting the position of Salman and his entourage in putting pressure on this dwarf state," Taylor said.
At the same time, he wonders if Saudi Arabia can sacrifice its strategic relationship with the United States, which was mainly formed during the meeting of the first monarch of the kingdom Abdulaziz and President Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930s, in order to strengthen relations with Russia? “Probably not,” the author says. However, at the same time, he notes that in recent years the Kingdom has demonstrated its willingness to radically change some aspects of the life of its society. “This is evidenced by the desire to weaken the dependence of the economy on the oil sector, and by allowing local women to drive a car, which was previously a stumbling block between local conservatives and reformers. It will probably be easier to get closer to Moscow than to solve one of these problems,”the Washington Post columnist sums up.
Promotional video:
***
In turn, the Russian Matters edition has published an article entitled "Iran and economic problems will complicate the rapprochement between Russia and Saudi Arabia." The article examines the issue of the “thaw” in relations between the two countries, including through the prism of relations between Moscow and Riyadh and Tehran. According to the author of the material Mark Katz, recent reports that the Kingdom has agreed to the fact that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad will remain in power is a sign of "clarifying" the priorities of the Saudis, rather than real warming between Damascus and Riyadh.
According to him, Saudi Arabia is in a difficult situation: the Americans and Turks are no longer interested in supporting the majority of opponents of official Damascus, in addition, Riyadh is stuck in Yemen, where Moscow maneuvered between the opposing sides, and Tehran supported the Houthis opposing the Saudis. “Given the current situation, Saudi Arabia can no longer provide support to the Sunni opposition in Syria, helping it to hold onto those small territories that are still under its control after the victories of the Syrian army. However, the Kingdom remains deeply concerned about the growing Iranian influence in this country and in the Middle East region as a whole. King Salman understands very well that Russia is the only one through whom the spread of Iranian influence can be limited,”the author writes.
Is it feasible? “In the past few years, there have been reports of Russian officials telling their Israeli counterparts and dignitaries in the Gulf monarchies that if they are truly concerned about Tehran’s rise in the Middle East, they’d better team up with Russia to contain it. And this means supporting the presence of Moscow and its strengthening in the region,”the observer explains. According to him, while the "Islamic State" (a terrorist organization banned in Russia) was at the peak of its power, Russia has constantly demonstrated its solidarity with Iran as its main ally in the Middle East. “But now that the Islamists have weakened and lost most of the territory, Tehran and its subordinate Hezbollah have increased proportionally,” the author notes.
It is not surprising, he emphasizes, that now that Assad, a common ally of Moscow and Tehran, is safe, and his enemies are significantly weakened, Russia and Iran will enter into a struggle between themselves for spheres of influence in Syria. “The fact that Moscow is striving for cooperation with the Kurds, while Tehran, together with Ankara, on the contrary, are striving for escalation, speaks of the growing contradictions in the coalition camp. And since the hostile relations between the Saudis and the Iranians will continue in the future, then Riyadh's hopes that Russia will prevail over Iran are quite reasonable and rational, Katz said.
He wonders, however, whether the Kremlin’s willingness to risk its relationship with Tehran in order to strengthen itself in Syria and, as a bonus, further improve relations with the Saudis, is strong. “Russia would like to get everything at once: both predominance in Syria and strong ties with both Tehran and Riyadh. But the Russians are unlikely to be able to achieve this in reality, "- says the observer. In his opinion, here the undisguised hostility of US President Donald Trump towards Iran comes to Moscow's aid. “When Barack Obama was in the White House, the Kremlin feared that the conclusion of a nuclear deal with Tehran would push the Iranians towards rapprochement with the United States, and hence their distance from Russia. Back then, the Russians clearly did not want to irritate the Iranians for fear of encouraging Iranian-American rapprochement. Now, fortunately for the Kremlin,the appearance in the White House of Republican Trump prevented this, "Katz emphasizes.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and his Iranian counterpart Hossein Dehgan
The hostility of the new American administration is pushing Tehran towards Moscow, the author says. “It is possible that to the point that the Iranians will not be able to adequately respond if the Russians take actions that run counter to Tehran’s plans,” he writes. According to Katz, even the strengthening of Russian influence in Syria, as opposed to Iranian, and the friendship between Moscow and Riyadh will not force Tehran to make friends with Washington. “Iran, of course, will be in conflict with Russia after the final defeat of the militants, but at the same time it will be ready to cooperate with it against the common threat from across the ocean,” summarizes the observer of Russia Matters.
***
An interesting article was also published in the influential American edition of The National Interest. In an article titled “2019 could be extremely bad for Ukraine,” author Nicholas Gvozdev, professor at the Department of Economic Geography and National Security at the US Naval War College, notes that Russia has been consistently warning Ukraine for several years that it intends to stop using its territory for transit. of its gas to Europe. "If the Kremlin keeps its word, then a colossal hole will arise in the Ukrainian economy, which neither the United States nor the European Union will be able to plug," the observer believes.
According to him, analysts are surprised who are developing plans to include Ukraine in the Euro-Atlantic world, but at the same time to preserve Russian-Ukrainian relations in their previous form. “After the collapse of the USSR, this would be quite reasonable, since a weakened Russia had no choice but to use the Ukrainian gas transmission system to transport its blue fuel. Moscow was forced to support Kiev at the expense of preferential tariffs for energy resources, and in return, it received the opportunity to supply oil and gas to Europe, Gvozdev writes.
However, this situation could not last long, he claims. The author notes that Russia, for example, has already revised its relations with the Baltic states, proceeding from its national interests. “When Moscow realized that Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania would join the EU and NATO, they began to create a new export infrastructure near St. Petersburg, which now includes the huge port of Ust-Luga, due to which only the cargo turnover of the Tallinn port fell over the past two years by 30%,”writes Gvozdev, stressing that such measures have allowed Russia to reduce infrastructure dependence on the Baltic states.
According to him, both ex-Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and former President Viktor Yanukovych were well aware of the dangers threatening Ukraine, so they sought to conclude long-term relations with Russia, thanks to which it would use the Ukrainian route for transporting energy resources, since it was much cheaper than the costs for the construction of detours to the south and north. “To sweeten the pill and prevent the Black Sea Fleet from leaving for Novorossiysk, Yanukovych signed a long-term lease agreement that allowed the Russians to stay in Crimea,” the author notes.
But after the events of 2014, Gvozdev emphasizes, Moscow has again taken up plans to abandon the Ukrainian route. “Russia seems determined to leave energy transportation through Ukraine a thing of the past. And when Moscow does this, it will be a real shock for Kiev. The Ukrainian state energy company will be left with a huge network of pipelines, pumping stations and storage facilities, frantically trying to find new clients for all this,”the author predicts the near future.
He is sure that foreign companies will not want to invest money there, at least until peace comes to the east of the country. “At the same time, it is possible that when Russia stops using the Ukrainian route, the conflict in Donbass will flare up with renewed vigor. It is also worth noting that separatism has not yet manifested itself in the places where the pipeline passes. But everything can change in 2019,”the observer believes. Gvozdev notes that some forces in the EU are trying to put pressure on Moscow and force it to continue using the Ukrainian gas transportation system, but this strategy is doomed to failure.
“The doors to the alternative southern (Turkish) energy supply route are open because President Recep Erdogan has no incentive to act in the interests of the Europeans. The same is with the northern route: German Chancellor Angela Merkel firmly stated that despite the American sanctions, she intends to ensure the energy security of Germany and the tranquility of German investments, which is impossible without Nord Stream 2, the author emphasizes. Thus, he concludes, the statements of Western analysts about the blocking of Russian plans have nothing to do with reality.
***
In turn, Bloomberg published an article by the columnist Mark Whitehouse under the headline "Russia must love climate skeptics." The author notes that global warming will be extremely beneficial for Russia. “The increase in average temperatures will be a boon for countries in the northern latitudes and will result in colossal problems for the south,” he writes. According to him, Russia, as undoubtedly a northern country known for its harsh climate, thanks to an increase in average temperatures even by one degree, will receive a significant profit due to an increase in its gross domestic product.
The observer argues that the Kremlin should thank US President Donald Trump for Russia's future prosperity amid climate change. The fact is that the American president in June announced that the United States was withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement, in accordance with which Washington assumed obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere by 26-28 percent compared to the 12-year level. prescription. "With the US withdrawal from the agreement, it will be much more difficult to stop the rise in temperatures on the planet, since the United States is the second largest carbon dioxide emitter after China," explains Whitehouse.
According to him, the latest review of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) analyzes climate change and the consequences to which it will lead to certain macroregions and individual more or less large states. "The Scandinavian countries and Russia will undoubtedly benefit from the rise in temperature, where one should expect an increase in living standards," the observer quotes the report. At the same time, he notes that one should not expect the emergence of a "tropical paradise" in these countries, in addition, most likely, they will face the threat of an influx of refugees from the southern regions, who will flee the consequences of global warming and associated natural disasters such as droughts and hurricanes. …
And while more than half of the world's population will face a climatic catastrophe, Russia, with its vast expanses and a small population for such a size, will receive tremendous benefits. “I can’t say whether the head of the White House imagines that his rejection of the Paris Agreement only strengthens America’s main enemy in the future. Perhaps the actions of the US President are dictated by this motive, and not by concern for the preservation of jobs,”concludes Whitehouse.
In general, the climate has historically played one of the main roles in the history of the formation and development of the Russian state. Unfortunately, nature for a Russian person was not a kind mother, but an evil stepmother, with whom he had to fight almost all year round. Due to the remoteness of Russia from the Atlantic current of the Gulf Stream, less warm air masses enter our territory, but due to the proximity of the Arctic, cold air masses are frequent guests. All this leads to long winters, an uncomfortable off-season and relatively short summers. This causes the traditionally low grain yield per hectare of farmland compared to Europe and even Canada, as well as high costs both in agriculture and industry (heating of premises, increased energy consumption, higher construction costs on freezing soil, etc.).
In this sense, global warming is indeed a historic opportunity for Russia and gives it colossal advantages for managing the economy, building infrastructure and increasing investment attractiveness. Reducing the cost of combating unfavorable climatic conditions and increasing productivity in industry and agriculture can bring our country to the group of real leaders of the world economy. The main thing is to be able to use this chance correctly.
Prepared by Ivan Proshkin