Why Is Moscow Risking a New Cold War ?

Strategic bombers off the American coast, battleships in the Mediterranean -- the Russian military is displaying its might once again with Moscow pumping billions into new weapons. But where does the Kremlin see its enemies today, and why is it risking another nuclear arms race with Washington?

At eleven o'clock at night, when the moon is reflected in the slow-moving waters of the Volga River, when the steppes are exhaling the heat of the day, and when the last bars are closing in Yekaterinburg and Pokrovsk -- old provincial cities on the river's left bank that are now called Marx and Engels --, Gennady Stekachov is on his way into world politics. And everyone can hear it.

The shutters shake in the crooked old wooden houses German settlers built 250 years ago, and the windowpanes rattle in the prefabricated high-rise apartment buildings from Soviet days. The cause of the commotion is Stekachov guiding his 150-ton, long-range bomber down a runway outside the city and, together with his crew of seven other men, taking off into the night sky.

He follows his usual route north, up to the Arctic Sea and the Barents Sea, and then turns sharply to the West to circle the polar ice cap. The first NATO fighters, now on high alert, have appeared by the time Stekachov reaches the Norwegian coast. From there on the jets -- French Mirages, British Tornados or Norwegian F-16s -- escort the Tupolev Tu-95 past the Shetland and Faeroe Islands to a point off the American coast.

Because the Russians feel duped. And because NATO refuses to ratify the "modified" CSE Treaty because Moscow has not yet emptied a storage facility of obsolete weapons in the small Republic of Moldova. Almost 20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, weapons in the new NATO member states are still counted toward the upper limits the CSE Treaty imposed on the now outdated "Eastern group of countries." Meanwhile, the Western alliance possesses a real advantage in terms of conventional armed forces.
The Russians call the situation "absurd," and even Western political scientists agree that it is time for NATO to change its position. Instead of seeking a negotiated solution, instead of reassuring the Kremlin that it is not out to contain or discriminate against Russia, critics say NATO has maneuvered itself into a corner. Moscow has not allowed any foreign military inspectors into the country since last December, and it has stopped notifying the rest of Europe about troop movements and military exercises.

Good points were raised in the article. The writer also raised some issues about the Chinese as well. But he misses the key reason entirely. Russian pride is not the reason why Russia insists on confronting the U.S. It is not about Putin's desire to build up Russian military might.

The key reason is Oil. Russia has the second largest supply of oil and natural gas in the world. We have more oil and natural gas in Alaska but our supply is being kept secret. Putin also knows his covert operatives working within the DNC will not let us drill for oil.

Every time a voice cries out "drill here, drill now," Putin is laughing. The extreme left wing of the Democratic Party want to save the planet. They would rather die in protests than admit Russia is a genuine threat.

Also Putin is convinced he fooled the whole world when he smuggled Iraq's WMD to Syria. 'Bush lied, people died' chanting is still going on in our streets. Our dumbed down electorate is addicted to television sound bites. Goofy GenXers cheer for Oprah's political views. Fools have the advantage today. Clowns are in charge of both political parties today. 'Nuff said.

No one listens. No one really cares. Yada, Yada and Yada.

Because all the leaders which followed after the fall of the Soviets are former Communist Soviets. They have no desire nor inclination to let go of the old ways and, unfortunately, this time they can actually succeed because instead of running the Russian economy under the communist ideology they are using a Western approach embedded with dictatorship. They have the natural resources to be independent(no whining Liberals would be allowed to spew anything) and they have the backing of an influential and dangerous Russian Mafia (which needs not to be ignored) and, more so, the people themselves, in need and desire again of a powerful Mother Russia.

In at least half a dozen threads I’ve made the point Putin’s military buildup is bluff. Ronald Reagan understood what the “best and brightest” overlooked, the Russian economy is too small to support a Superpower-level military. Even with oil, nothing has changed. This article puts numbers to that.

“the army has taken delivery on only 90 outdated tanks in the last seven years”

“Experts ridicule the much-touted T-95, which has been talked about for 15 years, as a “fiction.”

During former President Vladimir Putin’s term in office, the air force received only two new Su-34 fighter-bombers, and the Su-35 fighter jet, unveiled last year as a new model, is in fact a close cousin of an aircraft that was already airborne ...in ...1985.

Russian designers are “no less than 20 years behind their US counterparts in the development of their fifth-generation fighter jets.”

Only 50 percent of all aircraft and helicopters nationwide are in operation, and the Russian military will experience a shortfall of 4,500 aircraft next year when outdated equipment is removed from service.

Under Putin, 405 missiles and 2,498 nuclear warheads were decommissioned, but only 27 new missiles were produced — three times less than under the Yeltsin regime. And the shelf life of 80 percent of Russia’s mobile ICBMs expired long ago. By the end of 2012, both powers will have between 1,700 and 2,200 nuclear warheads left in their arsenals. But the Russians know that by then no more than 1,000 of their warheads will be serviceable

And the “Cudgel,” the new “Bulava” ICBM, with which the military leadership plans to upgrade its nuclear fleet? Almost every test run so far has proven to be a failure.

Russia’s conventional armed forces “will decline to the level of a medium-sized European nation in eight to 10 years, and we will not be able to keep up with countries like Turkey or Japan.”

The military leadership’s motto, says Arbatov, can be summed up this way: better to be big than effective.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.