... almost open nuclear game, but in different forms and with different objectives. Both Russia and the United States are well aware of the presence of the nuclear weapons factor in this conflict. Russia's main objective is to deter the United States and NATO from directly intervening in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The U.S., on the other hand, tends to believe that Russia will not or dare not use nuclear weapons and can therefore boldly provide military support to Ukraine. Both sides are at loggerheads,...
... militarily neutral country enjoying the trade, investment, and logistical benefits of its position between Russia and the European Union was dismissed by Washington as “giving the Kremlin a veto right” over its neighbor’s security status. Instead, NATO’s unrestrained expansion was upheld as almost a sacred principle. This led to an outcome that many had predicted: Moscow’s pushback.
Rather than reaching for a compromise settlement via the Minsk accords, the West and its Ukrainian protégés ...
... Russia issued ultimatums on long-term security guarantees, threatening
“military and technical measures”
in case of refusal. The nature of these measures was revealed with the launch of the military operation on Ukrainian territory which shocked ... ... with Russia about its concerns; the opposite was the case.
One could argue that the comparison is flawed because the US and its NATO allies are not directly threatened by the Ukraine conflict, whereas nuclear escalation is another matter entirely. But this ...
There is no way Ukraine and NATO can “win” the military confrontation against Russia, and the best-case scenario they can project is tying down Russia in an endless conflict
In welcoming Finland to NATO during a visit to Helsinki on June 2, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken ...
... This does not mean direct support for the relevant [nuclear and missile] programs of Tehran and Pyongyang, but Moscow’s refusal to participate in the policy of international pressure on them with Washington leading the role is more than logical.
Elena ... ... Ukrainian crisis, but before its culmination, this issue has more historical significance. I remember well that during the Cold War, NATO’s strategy provided for nuclear strikes against the forces of Warsaw Pact Organization in order to stop their rapid attack ...
... very important in this plan.
CGTN: At present, the AUKUS and relevant nuclear-powered submarine cooperation programs have aroused strong concerns in the Asia-Pacific region. How do you comment on this move by the U.S.?
Sanakoev:
They are making a new NATO in the Asia-Pacific region. It's crazy of them. We even don't understand why mankind needs NATO. When they cannot answer this question, they are opening another project AUKUS in the Asia-Pacific region.
This is not the way of developing. The only ...
On March 16, 2023, a regular online international expert dialog on Russia-NATO relations was held, bringing together experts, former diplomats and military, public leaders from Russia, the USA, and European NATO member-states
On March 16, 2023, a regular online international expert dialog on Russia-NATO relations was held, bringing together experts, former diplomats and military, public leaders from Russia, the USA, and European NATO member-states.
The ...
If the weapons including tanks provided by Washington and NATO countries are used to seize Russia's "constitutional territory" or used a sub-caliber armor-piercing projectile with a uranium core, Russia will take "severe retaliatory action" and may have serious consequences
"German ...
... “proxy wars.” North Korea and China fought while having the Soviet Union behind them. Ukraine is backed by the United States, NATO, the European Union, and several other countries. However, this is where the similarities end and the major differences begin.... ... troops and their allies took Pyongyang, Seoul already began to plan the unification under their rule. Neither the USSR nor the USA set as their goal the revision of the system of international relations, which they (together with Great Britain) agreed upon ...
... at least 50. And in January 2021, a
car bombing
in the same Afrin region claimed the lives of six civilians and wounded about 25 others. No one has taken responsibility for the attack, but Ankara blamed the YPG for the explosion.
Neither Turkey’s NATO allies nor most EU countries, which included the PKK in their terrorist lists, had any doubts about its terrorist component. But Ankara’s partners have been less consistent with the PKK affiliates of the KCK. Washington has chosen the Syrian branch ...
