Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russia fears NATO more than terrorism-"to replace its military doctrine with a more hawkish version"
Syney Morning Herald ^ | March 8, 2007 | Luke Harding

Posted on 03/07/2007 6:51:39 AM PST by Ooh-Ah

RUSSIA is to replace its military doctrine with a more hawkish version that boldly identifies NATO and the West as its greatest danger.

In a statement posted on its website, Russia's powerful Security Council said it no longer considered global terrorism to be its biggest danger. Instead, Russia was developing a new national security strategy that reflected changing "geo-political" realities, and the fact that rival military alliances were becoming "stronger" - "especially NATO".

"There have been changes in the character of the threat to the military security of Russia. More and more leading world states are seeking to upgrade their national armed forces. The configuration has changed," the council said.

Though the President, Vladimir Putin, ordered his generals to revise the military doctrine in June 2005, the blueprint reflects the sudden deterioration in relations with the West. In particular Russia has been incensed by the Bush Administration's plans to site two missile interceptor and radar bases in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Senior figures in the Russian military said on Tuesday that they were infuriated by what they regard as NATO's "relentless expansion" into "post-Soviet space" - the countries of former communist Eastern Europe and the Baltic. Russia felt increasingly "encircled" by hostile neighbours, they said.

Russia's Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, said that Washington had failed to explain why it wanted to site missile bases on Russia's doorstep. Mr Putin has ridiculed the US claim that the bases were designed to shoot down rogue missiles from Iran or North Korea, claiming their real target is Russia's nuclear arsenal.

It is not clear when Russia's new doctrine will be in place. But the council is likely to recommend a new strategy by the end of the year, military sources said. The doctrine follows a big increase in military expenditure announced last month.

Analysts said the new doctrine would be "much tougher" than the one adopted in 2000.

"It will be much harsher towards the US and NATO. The doctrine will reflect Russia's concerns about NATO enlargement and the ABM [anti-ballistic missile] system deployment close to Russia's borders," Sergei Kortunov, a former member of the council, and professor at Moscow's School of Economics, said. He added: "Russia is concerned about the US's creation of new arms systems. It is also worried about the dangers to Russia from the US and other Western countries, and their political role in the countries of the post-Soviet space."

The chairman of Russia's academy of military science, Mahmoud Garayev, said Russia could no longer afford to ignore the threat from NATO. Drugs and terrorism were an irrelevance, he said.

The doctrine comes as the Bush Administration has reportedly decided to step up its arguably erratic bilateral engagement with Moscow.

The New York Times has reported that the White House intends to "reach out more often and more intensively" to Russia, an acknowledgment in effect that it has not always consulted Russia on foreign policy and national security plans.

Guardian News & Media


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: cccp; coldwar2; nato; putin; russia; sovietunion; terrorism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-46 next last

1 posted on 03/07/2007 6:51:42 AM PST by Ooh-Ah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ooh-Ah

I have noticed lately that those who speak out against the Russian government seem to be accident prone. One reporter fell out of a window.


2 posted on 03/07/2007 6:57:00 AM PST by Piquaboy (22 year veteran of the Army, Air Force and Navy, Pray for all our military .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ooh-Ah
Russia could no longer afford to ignore the threat from NATO. Drugs and terrorism were an irrelevance, he said.

As is the slow Chinese repopulation of Siberia...

3 posted on 03/07/2007 6:57:51 AM PST by Pearls Before Swine (Is /sarc really needed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ooh-Ah
I wouldn't have predicted this outcome in a million years. Muslim terrorism is clearly the top enemy to both the USA and to Russia, we need only look back at Beslan to see that this is true. And now Putin wants to point his polonium-stained finger at us.

He is making a big mistake. Not in his reasoning, for he knows all too well that this bluster about NATO being more dangerous than Muslim terrorism is false. Putin is erring in alienating us when we need to be working together. If he wants to bring back the Cold War, he will regret it. And for certain, Russia will continue to be attacked by Muslim terrorists, with or without our help. Unless Putin is secretly siding with the Muslims against us...and may God help Russia if that is the case. A majority Muslim Russia is truly the world's worst nightmare. Mohammed with thousands of deliverable nuclear weapons. Think about it.

4 posted on 03/07/2007 7:01:26 AM PST by Sender (Try to look unimportant; they may be low on ammo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ooh-Ah

We'll just have to win the cold war again.


5 posted on 03/07/2007 7:03:43 AM PST by boomop1 (there you go again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sender

Russia seems at least adept at dealing with Muslims on it's territory. Christian education in schools, zero tolerance for islamofascism.


6 posted on 03/07/2007 7:04:53 AM PST by kawaii (Orthodox Christianity -- Proclaiming the Truth Since 33 A.D.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ooh-Ah

Putin is a bigger threat to Russia than NATO.


7 posted on 03/07/2007 7:05:08 AM PST by Mad Federalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sender
Russia's entire history is one of almost attaining greatness before self-destructing.

Five years and we'll be feeding them again.
8 posted on 03/07/2007 7:08:39 AM PST by struwwelpeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ooh-Ah
Russia is very nervous anytime anyone gets close to her borders. Putting missile defense sites in old Soviet block nations is a sure way to get the Bear angry. As is the slow invasion of Siberia by China
9 posted on 03/07/2007 7:11:43 AM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sender
...Putin is secretly siding with the Muslims against us.
With this strategy, he wins--we won't call him on it or make him pay. And, he gets market$ and possibly some help for the terror problem he faces at home.
10 posted on 03/07/2007 7:13:28 AM PST by Ooh-Ah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ooh-Ah

This caught my eye:

"The New York Times has reported that the White House intends to "reach out more often and more intensively" to Russia, an acknowledgment in effect that it has not always consulted Russia on foreign policy and national security plans."

Why should we consult them?

Russia has aligned itself for Iran and Syria and against Israel. I think the increased babble from Moscow is directly related to our more aggressive stance against Iran. If we strike Iran I hope we keep a keen eye on Russian movements.


11 posted on 03/07/2007 7:21:49 AM PST by Albert Barr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kawaii

"Russia seems at least adept at dealing with Muslims on it's territory. Christian education in schools, zero tolerance for islamofascism."

...but they love islamofascism on their borders, so long as it's islamofascists thay pay hard currency for weapons.

Iran...


12 posted on 03/07/2007 7:28:58 AM PST by GovernmentIsTheProblem (Capitalism is the economic expression of individual liberty. Pass it on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Piquaboy

Well let them out of it! It's not good to force anything down the throat of those who will never accept it.


13 posted on 03/07/2007 7:41:00 AM PST by peacepipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentIsTheProblem

yea but i'd love to see us adopt the zero tolerance and christian education in schools.

i'd love to see us nix relations with muslim monarchies and dictatorships too.

foxnews yesterday had an article on saudi arabia where a women who was raped is being charged for being alone with men while her rapists all go free. how many hijacker were saudi citizens?


14 posted on 03/07/2007 7:42:05 AM PST by kawaii (Orthodox Christianity -- Proclaiming the Truth Since 33 A.D.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Ooh-Ah

Why wouldn't they fear NATO more than terrorism? They know how to handle terrorists, blow away the terrorists, their families, the towns they came from, and to hell with any innocents who get in the way and anybody who complains about the overkill.


15 posted on 03/07/2007 7:45:43 AM PST by penowa (NO more Bushes; NO more Clintons EVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redgolum
...the slow invasion of Siberia by China

Dr. Jack Wheeler: Chinese Siberia

The geopolitical bottom line is that there is no way Russia is going to be able to hold on to Siberia for much longer. Within 20 years or less, it's going to be Chinese Siberia.
- - - - -
For all of this is a reminder that our tussles with Mexico and Moslems are just the preliminaries - that the Main Event of the 21st Century will be America's struggle with Communist China.

Interesting. Informative. Scary... a China possessing Eastern Siberia with all its resources would be in position to become the next superpower.

16 posted on 03/07/2007 8:25:10 AM PST by Max in Utah (WWBFD? "What Would Ben Franklin Do?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Max in Utah
You may be right. After the Muslims will come the Chinese, who will own all the dollars and all the Wal-Marts, and with Siberian resources...

Sun Tzu was a clever fellow.

17 posted on 03/07/2007 9:31:04 AM PST by Sender (Try to look unimportant; they may be low on ammo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sender
this bluster about NATO being more dangerous than Muslim terrorism is false.

Tell me, did US suffer more from 9/11 than Serbia suffered from NATO?

18 posted on 03/07/2007 11:41:48 AM PST by A. Pole (Hush Bimbo: "Low wage is good for you!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

As of right now, I don't think it is a threat. Anyway, most Chinese in Sibera have a beef with the PRC government, and wouldn't help them at all (they don't like the Russians either, and are subjected to re-education camps if sent back to China)


19 posted on 03/07/2007 12:08:23 PM PST by Thunder90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sender

Why? During the war in Kosovo Clinton and his butt boy General Clark nearly got us into a war with Russia, China and India. Lucky for us people with in NATO refused a direct order to attack the Russians.


20 posted on 03/07/2007 1:38:06 PM PST by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric cartman voice* ?I love you guys?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-46 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson