I don’t buy it. Russia has its own problems with Muslims and the last thing they want is Central Asia seething with Islamism.
The NYT editorial board just has an animus against Russia and want to start WWIII.
[I dont buy it. Russia has its own problems with Muslims and the last thing they want is Central Asia seething with Islamism.]
Real life isn’t a Star Wars episode, where each ally is clamoring to take on more danger. In real life, allies want the easiest jobs but put out press releases claiming credit for someone else’s victory.
We allied with the Soviets against Germany. The Brits allied with the US against Germany and Japan, even though they knew that FDR wanted their empire completely dismantled. Countries make temporary arrangements because they want to do things without paying the entire cost themselves. What’s wrong with paying one enemy to fight another? The US is the primary country preventing Russian territorial expansion. For the Russians, Islam is a minor problem solvable via traditional Russian methods:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circassian_genocide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Chechens_and_Ingush
The American challenge isn’t.
The Nyt has it in for the Russkies because they abandoned communism.
Russia sees the writing on the wall in Afghanistan. Without the US military presence to prop them up, the Afghan government is too weak to defeat the Taliban. Having a working relationship with the eventual victors of the Afghan civil war makes strategic sense for Russia. The Taliban are useful allies in the fight against ISIS.