The truth about Russia's adventure to Syria rightly explained.

JUBILANT crowds waved Russian flags; homecoming pilots were given fresh-baked bread by women in traditional dress. Judging by the pictures on television, Vladimir Putin won a famous victory in Syria this week. After his unexpected declaration that the campaign is over, Mr Putin is claiming credit for a ceasefire and the start of peace talks. He has shown off his forces and, heedless of civilian lives, saved the regime of his ally, Bashar al-Assad (though Mr Assad himself may yet prove dispensable). He has “weaponised” refugees by scattering Syrians among his foes in the European Union. And he has outmanoeuvred Barack Obama, who has consistently failed to grasp the enormity of the Syrian civil war and the threat it poses to America’s allies in the Middle East and Europe.

Look closer, however, and Russia’s victory rings hollow. Islamic State (IS) remains. The peace is brittle. Even optimists doubt that diplomacy in Geneva will prosper (see article). Most important, Mr Putin has exhausted an important tool of propaganda.

As our briefing explains, Russia’s president has generated stirring images of war to persuade his anxious citizens that their ailing country is once again a great power, first in Ukraine and recently over the skies of Aleppo. The big question for the West is where he will stage his next drama. Advertisement Make Russia great again Mr Putin’s Russia is more fragile than he pretends. The economy is failing. The rise in oil prices after 2000, when Mr Putin first became president, provided $1.1 trillion of windfall export revenues for him to spend as he wished. But oil prices are three-quarters down from their peak.

Russian belts have tightened further because of sanctions imposed after Mr Putin attacked Ukraine. Living standards have fallen for the past two years and are falling still. The average salary in January 2014 was $850 a month; a year later it was $450. Mr Putin was losing legitimacy even before the economy shrivelled. Many Russians took to the streets in the winter of 2011-12 to demand that their country become a modern state with contested elections. Mr Putin responded by annexing Crimea and vowing to restore Russian greatness after the Soviet collapse—“the greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the 20th century, he called it. Part of his plan has been to modernise the armed forces, with a $720 billion weapons-renewal programme in 2010; part to use the media to turn Russia into a fortress against a hostile West; and part to intervene abroad. With action in Ukraine and Syria, he has made it appear that Russia is the equal—and rival—of America.

That is not only popular among ordinary Russians but also contains a serious message. Mr Putin fears that Russia, in its weakened state, could be vulnerable to what he sees as America’s impulse to subvert regimes using the language of universal democracy. In both Ukraine and Syria, he believes, America recklessly encouraged the overthrow of governments without being able to contain the chaos that followed. He intervened partly because he fears that the revolutions there must be seen to fail—or Russia itself could one day suffer a revolution of its own. So far his plans have worked. Beguiled by a pro-Kremlin broadcast media, ordinary Russians have been willing to trade material comfort for national pride. Mr Putin’s popularity ratings remain above 80%, far higher than most Western leaders’. But the narcotic of adventurism soon wears off. Since last October, the share of voters who feel the country is heading in the right direction has fallen from 61% to 51%. Russians tired of Ukraine; now Syria has peaked. Sooner or later, the cameras will crave action. Ukrainians are petrified once again.

What does this mean for the West? So far America, at least, has misunderstood Mr Putin’s aims. In the autumn Mr Obama predicted that Syria would be a Russian “quagmire”. Speaking to the Atlantic recently, he argued that Russia’s repeated resort to force is a sign of weakness. That is true, but not (as Mr Obama suggests) because it shows that Mr Putin cannot achieve his foreign-policy goals by persuasion. For him, military action is an end in itself. He needs footage of warplanes to fill his news bulletins. There will be no quagmire in Syria because the Kremlin is not in the business of nation-building.

Mr Obama thinks Russia should be left to its inevitable decline. Like a naughty child, Mr Putin is rewarded by American attentiveness, he believes. Yet, Syria shows how, when Mr Obama stands back in the hope that regional leaders will stop free-riding on American power and work together for the collective good, the vacuum is filled by disrupters like Iran and IS, and by Russia in its search for the next source of propaganda. So the West needs to be prepared. It is welcome that America is strengthening its forces in Europe. NATO’s European members should show similar mettle by putting troops in the Baltic states—which will require a change of heart in countries, such as Italy, that see any display of resolve as needlessly provoking Russia.

If there is trouble, NATO and the EU will need to respond immediately to show that Russia cannot prise open the collective-security guarantee that lies at the heart of NATO. Carry on Kiev The biggest test will be Ukraine—a focus of Russian attention and also the country most like Russia itself. If Ukraine can become a successful European state, it will show Russians that they have a path to liberal democracy. If, by contrast, Ukraine becomes a failed state, it will strengthen the Kremlin’s argument that Russia belongs to its own “orthodox” culture and that liberal democracy has nothing to teach it.

Alas, America and the EU have Kiev fatigue. Instead of doing everything in their power to help Ukraine, they expect Ukrainian politicians to prove that they are capable of reform on their own. That is a mistake. They should be offering financial help and technical advice. They should help root out corruption. And they should be patient. Eventually, deep Russian decline will limit its aggression. For the time being, however, a nuclear-armed Mr Putin is bent on imposing himself in the old Soviet sphere of influence. In Mr Obama’s last year as president, Mr Putin, fresh from Syrian success, could yet test the West one more time.

www.economist.com/news/leaders/21695003-dont-be-fooled-syria-vladimir-putins-foreign-policy-born-weakness-and-made?force=scn/tw/te/pe/ed/dontbefooledbysyriavladimiroutinsforeignpolicy

I read this few days ago. very interesting

Missy89:
I read this few days ago. very interesting

Bi.tch!


Useless article.

Missy89:
I read this few days ago. very interesting

Yes it is very insightful.I never really examined Russia's intervention in Syria as a response out of fear for it's own leadership.

BTW,please did you snatch Tkester's boyfriend cause I've never known the clown to have nice words directed at you

I agree, this article is useless. Breaking the back of Isis by taking out the oil trade with Turkey and stemming the tide of the syrian rebels is a huge win, no matter which way you spin it. This is going to boost Putin's image at home for sure. Their economy might very well tank, but it looks like Putin will survive based on this.

ValerianSteel:
Yes it is very insightful.I never really examined Russia's intervention in Syria as a response out of fear for it's own leadership.

BTW,please did you snatch Tkester's boyfriend cause I've never known the clown to have nice words directed at you

If sanctions remain for one more year, the country's leadership might unravel. This of course has its pros and cons

I have always ignored that dude. I don't respond to his gutter quotes. Still don't get the beef.

birdman:
I agree, this article is useless. Breaking the back of Isis by taking out the oil trade with Turkey and stemming the tide of the syrian rebels is a huge win, no matter which way you spin it. This is going to boost Putin's image at home for sure. Their economy might very well tank, but it looks like Putin will survive based on this.

Looks like you are actually agreeing with the article.

ValerianSteel:
Yes it is very insightful.I never really examined Russia's intervention in Syria as a response out of fear for it's own leadership.

BTW,please did you snatch Tkester's boyfriend cause I've never known the clown to have nice words directed at you

Thunder fire you and that your morinic gay partner, idi.ots. Gay spinsters

This is what the mainstream media does best - Demonizing Putin and every perceived enemy of Amerika.

Amerika is not hostile towards Russia but withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002, installed anti-ballistic missile systems in two east European countries, and has aggressively moved to expand NATO to the point that they are standing before the gates of Moscow - but you will never see this on the mainstream media.

The Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, signed by the vampire - George Herbert Walker Bush and then Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in the winter of 1990, was effectively breached by the construction of permanent Amerika's military bases in Bulgaria and Romania, and the installation of US ABM facilities: the general atmosphere produced by the new cold war, ofcourse, caused the Russians to formally withdraw from the treaty in 2007.

I almost shed tears, a few days ago when I read the following comment posted by an Amerikan on a blog about the demonizing attacks on Putin.

“My fucking God. What have we become? We have become the monsters. We are the threat. The “monsters” of my childhood have become the good guys. How long until the “monsters” of my childhood become our only hope?”

This guy who posted this comment is only 1 out of the millions of gullible Amerikans who have been brainwashed from birth into believing the Russians are monsters, whereas the reverse has always been the case.

Amerika's attacks on Putin are not directly related to the “sudden” discovery of his political economy system. The way it works has been known and studied in details for years.

The logic here is that in the upcoming presidential race Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate and the harsh critic of my son - Putin, is likely to face Donald Trump and the White House seeks to strengthen Clinton and weaken Trump.

The demonization of my son - Vladimirovich Putin can never change the reality that Russia has come a long way since the days of Stalin, and the more the West attempts to back Putin into a corner, the more he will be able to consolidate Russian public support for his policies.

Missy89:


If sanctions remain for one more year, the country's leadership might unravel. This of course has its pros and cons

I have always ignored that dude. I don't respond to his gutter quotes. Still don't get the beef.

Putin is loosing his propaganda war already.Many Russians are tired of the current state of the economy.They desire change,but the desired change will warrant a change in Russian policy which Russia is not ready to change with Putin in power.I wonder how long he will last under turbulent oil prices.

Lol! What next are they going to publish? Putin is gay? Russia never really launched Sputnik?

ValerianSteel:
Putin is loosing his propaganda war already.Many Russians are tired of the current state of the economy.They desire change,but the desired change will warrant a change in Russian policy which Russia is not ready to change with Putin in power.I wonder how long he will last under turbulent oil prices.

You are right. Sanctions need to be renewed this July. Seems to be working perfectly


Millions more Russians living in poverty as economic crisis bites

Nearly 20 million now surviving on wages which are below the poverty threshold according to latest state statistics

Russia’s recession-hit economy has propelled the country’s poverty rate to a nine-year high, state statistics showed, as the country struggles to cope with a crippling economic crisis.

An average of 19.2 million Russians – or 13.4% of the population – were living last year on less than 9,452 roubles ($139) a month, the minimum subsistence level determined by the Russian government in the fourth quarter.

This figure represents a 20% increase year-on-year, with an average 16.1 million people living below the poverty threshold in 2014.

More Russians have been slipping into poverty on the back of the Western sanctions and low oil prices that have battered the country’s energy-dependent economy and significantly diminished purchasing power.

But 2015 poverty indicators are still much lower than those from the early days of President Vladimir Putin’s first term in 2000, when 29% of the population found itself below the poverty threshold.

Increasing poverty represents a setback for the Kremlin strongman, whose popularity had long been fuelled by the growing wealth of the Russian population as a result of high oil prices in the first decade of his presidency.

Aided by state media, Putin has managed to maintain a vertiginous approval rating in spite of economic woes, reaching 87% in August, according to the Levada Centre, an independent pollster based in Moscow.

But the pollster’s latest data shows the population’s trust in Putin has eroded, dropping 10% over the last year to reach 73% this month.

Advertisement

Russia’s energy-reliant economy shrank by 3.7% in 2015 and is set to continue suffering this year.

In September, the World Bank warned against a “troubling” increase in poverty in Russia resulting from a sharp drop in the income of the most vulnerable social groups including pensioners.

Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev conceded in January that increasing poverty was “one of the most painful” consequences of the economic crisis.

Real wages in the country shrank 6.9% last month in comparison to the same period last year.

Retail sales were down 5.9% last month year-on-year.

Russia’s newly-founded rating agency said Monday it did not expect economic growth until 2018.

Putin should trace his steps especially we regards to punishing Ukraine because of his beef with the west. Would ever believe Ukraine will award the turk pilot that shot down Russian jet?

vedaxcool:
Putin should trace his steps especially we regards to punishing Ukraine because of his beef with the west. Would ever believe Ukraine will award the turk pilot that shot down Russian jet?

Really?

Same old nonsense from American idiots

Missy89:


Really?

Yeah

http://www.worldbulletin.net/news/166721/ukrainians-wish-to-honor-turkish-pilot-for-downing-russian-jet

https://dninews.com/article/turkish-pilot-who-shot-down-russian-jet-named-hero-ukraine

nonsense, what foreign policy goal has the u.s achieved without persuasion... very useless propaganda article nonsense.

vedaxcool:
Putin should trace his steps especially we regards to punishing Ukraine because of his beef with the west. Would ever believe Ukraine will award the turk pilot that shot down Russian jet?

These kind of Ukrainians below right? They can award ISIS themselves just to spite Russia for all I care. I wouldn't even put it past them. Bunch of loonies.
And I believe you will gladly lurch into that bit of bizarre allegation as yet further vindication that Russia is indeed in the wrong and is indeed losing the propaganda war....

Please don't let your Russophobia cause people to put your rationality or even your sanity into question. There is nothing worth celebrating, note worthy, strategic or sensible in citing the absurdity of the Ukranian junta - which shares no common history/goal or real alliance with Turkey by the way, except for their morbid hatred for Russia - honouring the perpetrator of a blatant act of aggression.

[size=14pt]Head of Ukrainian Security Service Blames Russia for Brussels Attacks[/size]



Prime Minister of Russia Dmitry Medvedev called the head of Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) Vasily Gritsak "a slowpoke", after he announced a Russian trace in Brussels explosions.

"The head of SBU Gritsak, who announced the involvement of Russia in the terrorist attacks in Brussels, - is a mo.ron," - wrote the Prime Minister on his page in Facebook in the comments under the post with condolences to the relatives of attack victims.

Just like the US hollowed war in Iraq and the so called air strikes it has been carrying out in Iraq and Syria for many years and months. The war in Iraq can't be called a win, they got their assets wiped by the alqaeda brigade and Taliban in Iraq and Afghanistan. They supported the mujahideen rebels during the Soviet war in Afghanistan by equipping them with stinger missiles to fall soviet planes despite the fact that the Soviets were there at the behest of the Afghan government, I don't need to tell you what happened in Vietnam as they were completely humiliated and was forced to retreat after expending billions of dollars and not to mention the more than 5-10thousand planes and helicopters lost during the battle of some phantom misconception of ideology by their leaders where they tagged communism "evil" and swore to defeat it. I guess you all no the outcome of that war.
Now talk about hypocrisy, you study the US.
They f**k**g own the economist so their trolls can always go there and drink from the cup of propaganda who inturn vomits the propogated fallacies here. Just like the way our body keeps good food for use and takes out the bad ones, it is left open for all to see.
Op try again.

ValerianSteel:
Putin is loosing his propaganda war already.Many Russians are tired of the current state of the economy.They desire change,but the desired change will warrant a change in Russian policy which Russia is not ready to change with Putin in power.I wonder how long he will last under turbulent oil prices.

I am curious..how do you know this? Do you know actual Russians? Serious question

Jesus Christ,
This American mainstream journalists are so pathetic,
Always talking about how the economy of another country will crumble, while their own is 19trillion in debt,
The hardly talk about the trillions in student loan debt, or that, the Average American carry credit for head pass anything,
The greatest threat to America is not Donald Trump or Isis or Russia,
It's journalists like this who keep spewing lies to Americans everyday, to further an agenda

birdman:


I am curious..how do you know this? Do you know actual Russians? Serious question

Yes I do.I have Russian friends and we argue just as much as I do with the brainless bots here.They are tired of the sanctions and the crippled Russian economy.If you were Russian too,am sure you'd be complaining about the bad state of the economy as well.

ValerianSteel:
Yes I do.I have Russian friends and we argue just as much as I do with the brainless bots here.They are tired of the sanctions and the crippled Russian economy.If you were Russian too,am sure you'd be complaining about the bad state of the economy as well.

Nuff russians despair on the state of the economy and the levels of corruption in Russia.

But it is the same case with US citizens. Hence the success of Trump and Bernie Sanders. The electorate are fed up with the corruption of the political classes, and the corporatocracy.

I think we are playing a game of which one will fall first. US or Russia. US is shaky too. Especially with the petrodollar. To crumble america all that is necessary is for enough countries to start dealing with each other bilaterally and ditch the dollar. Then how will US afford all it's expensive wars. Wars are not cheap and without petrodollar there is no way that US can afford all it's global adventures. I can't see any hungry G.I's willing to fight in the middle east. They will probably sell their arms to the first militia group they come across. Or better still sell their services to the highest bidder as mercenaries.

This article is just about a pot that is disgusted with the state of the kettle.

ValerianSteel:
Yes I do.I have Russian friends and we argue just as much as I do with the brainless bots here.They are tired of the sanctions and the crippled Russian economy.If you were Russian too,am sure you'd be complaining about the bad state of the economy as well.

he needs to check the polls conducted inside Russia itself by levada

PastorAIO:


Nuff russians despair on the state of the economy and the levels of corruption in Russia.

But it is the same case with US citizens. Hence the success of Trump and Bernie Sanders. The electorate are fed up with the corruption of the political classes, and the corporatocracy.

I think we are playing a game of which one will fall first. US or Russia. US is shaky too. Especially with the petrodollar. To crumble america all that is necessary is for enough countries to start dealing with each other bilaterally and ditch the dollar. Then how will US afford all it's expensive wars. Wars are not cheap and without petrodollar there is no way that US can afford all it's global adventures. I can't see any hungry G.I's willing to fight in the middle east. They will probably sell their arms to the first militia group they come across. Or better still sell their services to the highest bidder as mercenaries.

This article is just about a pot that is disgusted with the state of the kettle.

So if they ditch the dollar, what currency are they planning on using?

Missy89:


So if they ditch the dollar, what currency are they planning on using?

The most obvious would be the Euro.

PastorAIO:


The most obvious would be the Euro.

Even when most Eurozone members are buying more US securities? Please how do you reach this conclusion?

Missy89:


Even when most Eurozone members are buying more US securities? Please how do you reach this conclusion?

What conclusion? That the Euro would provide an option for anyone that wants to ditch dollars? I got that from pretty much every news publication I've read on the subject, as well as from engaging with people involved in the financial markets.

For instance this article mentions it peripherally…. http://www.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/publications/reports/pdf/SR012/casarini.pdf

China’s financial resources are sought after, both to contribute to solving the eurozone’s debt problem and to continue sustaining the America’s structural deficit. Beijing has protected its position as the largest investor in US treasuries by disinvesting away from dollar-denominated assets and increasing its holdings of the euro.

I don't quite see what Eurozone members buying US securities has to do with anything I've said. Especially when their contributions are so minimal to the sum of US securities being traded. Perhaps you could explain your thinking there.

ValerianSteel:
Yes I do.I have Russian friends and we argue just as much as I do with the brainless bots here.They are tired of the sanctions and the crippled Russian economy.If you were Russian too,am sure you'd be complaining about the bad state of the economy as well.

You do realise that the sanctions are not a Russian government policy but rather are imposed from without by a US led group.

it reminds me of a conversation I had not long ago about Cuba. Here is a country of high cultural and educational achievements that even exports doctors to third world countries for charity. Yet it has suffered under sanctions from US, not just sanctions but embargo. Sure there are many Cubans dissatisfied with their state of affairs, but can you take US out of the cause of their problems.

Even Haiti sef. No nation can survive without trade. It's one thing to say you won't trade with a nation but to then stop other people that want to trade with the nation nko? Is that not wickedness?

ValerianSteel:
The truth about Russia's adventure to Syria rightly explained.



www.economist.com/news/leaders/21695003-dont-be-fooled-syria-vladimir-putins-foreign-policy-born-weakness-and-made?force=scn/tw/te/pe/ed/dontbefooledbysyriavladimiroutinsforeignpolicy

Here are some cursory notes I've made on the article:

He has “weaponised” refugees by scattering Syrians among his foes in the European Union. And he has outmanoeuvred Barack Obama, who has consistently failed to grasp the enormity of the Syrian civil war and the threat it poses to America’s allies in the Middle East and Europe.

Wow, this Putin must be such a clever man for him to have orchestrated in such fine detail the scattering of syrian refugees into Europe. Oh but wait, the refugee crisis had started before Russia even got involved in Syria. Hmmm….
Then 'his foes in the European Union'? That immediately exposes the writers of this articles. They see Putin as a 'foe' and immediately project their animosity unto him. Where did Putin call the European Union his foes? What is the basis for such a dumb statement?
And of course such an article is not complete without a bit of Obama bashing. 'hey let's all blame the black man'!. Perhaps the supporters of this articles would care to tell us what Obama should have done.

Look closer, however, and Russia’s victory rings hollow. Islamic State (IS) remains. The peace is brittle. Even optimists doubt that diplomacy in Geneva will prosper (see article). Most important, Mr Putin has exhausted an important tool of propaganda.

And who said that Putin's objective was to remove IS? I thought it was to prop up the government of Bashar Al Assad which was about to be defeated before Russia stepped in. Now Bashar Al Assad has more of an upper hand, and Russia has stepped out of the conflict so as not to get stuck in a quagmire. Every good military expedition sets out it's objectives and stops once it's objectives have been achieved.
Without a doubt Putin's 'propaganda' is wearing thin but not as thin as US propaganda. I don't know of any western youth (below age 25 or even 30) that takes the western press seriously.

That is not only popular among ordinary Russians but also contains a serious message. Mr Putin fears that Russia, in its weakened state, could be vulnerable to what he sees as America’s impulse to subvert regimes using the language of universal democracy. In both Ukraine and Syria, he believes, America recklessly encouraged the overthrow of governments without being able to contain the chaos that followed. He intervened partly because he fears that the revolutions there must be seen to fail—or Russia itself could one day suffer a revolution of its own. So far his plans have worked. Beguiled by a pro-Kremlin broadcast media, ordinary Russians have been willing to trade material comfort for national pride. Mr Putin’s popularity ratings remain above 80%, far higher than most Western leaders’. But the narcotic of adventurism soon wears off. Since last October, the share of voters who feel the country is heading in the right direction has fallen from 61% to 51%. Russians tired of Ukraine; now Syria has peaked. Sooner or later, the cameras will crave action. Ukrainians are petrified once again

'to what he sees as'… Abeg forget what he sees (as if they have a crystal ball to read his mind and what he is seeing. Question: Does America go about subverting various regimes (without or without the language of universal democracy? The answer is a resounding YES! So whether Putin sees things as that or not, the fact remains that it is true and every nation in the world interested in securing it's own sovereignty should be on guard against that.

Again we should ask: Is this true or not? The answer is 'YES, it is TRUE'

These people and their magic crystal ball shaaaaa. So they've read his mind and concluded that he intervened because he is afraid that if these revolutions succeed then the people in Russia will revolt too. The Russians will look at Iraq and then look at Libya etc and they'll say, 'hmmm, we'd like some of that yes please'. The writer of this article is so dumb, or perhaps he writes in the hopes that his readers will be so dumb.
So Putin's popularity rating is higher than any other western world leader, and there has been a dip in those feeling that the country is headed in the right direction from 61 % to 51 % and that gives us hope that there'll be a revolution in Russia. Talk about Wishful thinking!! I wonder what the same statistics would say for the USA.
"The Ukrainians are petrified"? - No Comment.

What does this mean for the West? So far America, at least, has misunderstood Mr Putin’s aims. In the autumn Mr Obama predicted that Syria would be a Russian “quagmire”. Speaking to the Atlantic recently, he argued that Russia’s repeated resort to force is a sign of weakness. That is true, but not (as Mr Obama suggests) because it shows that Mr Putin cannot achieve his foreign-policy goals by persuasion. For him, military action is an end in itself. He needs footage of warplanes to fill his news bulletins. There will be no quagmire in Syria because the Kremlin is not in the business of nation-building.

These writers understand Putin more than Obama does, after all they can read his mind and maybe they are even lovers that share pillow talk.
Syria was not quagmire for Russia because Russia set it's objectives and withdrew once those objectives were achieved. The objective was to prop up Assad and give him a fighting chance.
These fools seem to think that the sole objective of Putin's involvement in Syria was just a photo op for the media. No mention of the fact that Assad's Syria is a staunch ally of Russia's. No mention of the fact that if a clear path is made for a pipeline to be built through syria into Europe then Russia will be weakened geopolitically.
Before they ask Russia to be in the business of nation-building, they should asked how their nation building in Libya and Iraq went. Did it go well?

Mr Obama thinks Russia should be left to its inevitable decline. Like a naughty child, Mr Putin is rewarded by American attentiveness, he believes. Yet, Syria shows how, when Mr Obama stands back in the hope that regional leaders will stop free-riding on American power and work together for the collective good, the vacuum is filled by disrupters like Iran and IS, and by Russia in its search for the next source of propaganda. So the West needs to be prepared. It is welcome that America is strengthening its forces in Europe. NATO’s European members should show similar mettle by putting troops in the Baltic states—which will require a change of heart in countries, such as Italy, that see any display of resolve as needlessly provoking Russia.

These idiots are just war-mongering. If IS are such disrupters then how comes the US have been supporting them. US's strategy was to get Assad out by any means necessary including the use of IS. But according to these muppets the middle eastern regional leaders (does this include IS leadership?) cannot work together for the collective good without a free ride on American power. 'So the West needs to be prepared'. strengthen forces within Europe, get NATO to put troops in the Baltic states next to Russia. Russia are weak, we've seen it with our crystal balls, all we have to do is call their bluff by 'needlessly provoking' them. Hurray!!

If there is trouble, NATO and the EU will need to respond immediately to show that Russia cannot prise open the collective-security guarantee that lies at the heart of NATO. Carry on Kiev The biggest test will be Ukraine—a focus of Russian attention and also the country most like Russia itself. If Ukraine can become a successful European state, it will show Russians that they have a path to liberal democracy. If, by contrast, Ukraine becomes a failed state, it will strengthen the Kremlin’s argument that Russia belongs to its own “orthodox” culture and that liberal democracy has nothing to teach it.

And this needless provocation ought to be done in Ukraine where we have a nice Fascist government in place willing to do our bidding. Hurray!

Alas, America and the EU have Kiev fatigue. Instead of doing everything in their power to help Ukraine, they expect Ukrainian politicians to prove that they are capable of reform on their own. That is a mistake. They should be offering financial help and technical advice. They should help root out corruption. And they should be patient. Eventually, deep Russian decline will limit its aggression. For the time being, however, a nuclear-armed Mr Putin is bent on imposing himself in the old Soviet sphere of influence. In Mr Obama’s last year as president, Mr Putin, fresh from Syrian success, could yet test the West one more time.

In other words let's forget about their sovereignty and poke our nose into their government whether we're invited or not. Let's be paranoid and go about spoiling for a fight. Or maybe not. Russia will eventually decline? Wait o! Isn't this what they accused Obama of thinking and saying that he didn't understand Russia. Oh okay I geddit. Let's blame the black guy. I can't wait for Obama's term to be over so that America's eventual demise can occur in the hands of a white man.