Also in 1938.........
ALERT RUSSIA INVADES UKRAINE - Consolidated Thread
- Thread starter danielboon
- Start date
northern watch
TB Fanatic
northern watch
TB Fanatic
CaryC
Has No Life - Lives on TB
For those who may not be familiar with Military jargon:
A division like 2nd Armored or 1st Cav, while the number can go up and down, in general consists of 15,000 men. That's total which would include cooks, clerks, etc.
And a brigade can fluctuate greatly is in general around 1500 troops, in total.
So 5000/1500 = 3 1/3 brigades. Speed bump against 105,000 Russian troops they ain't there to stop Russia.
I would also note, even though it may be a minor point, they keep saying..... to "Eastern Europe" and not specially Ukraine. We have NATO allies in "eastern europe" but Ukraine isn't one of them.
Just some thoughts.
A division like 2nd Armored or 1st Cav, while the number can go up and down, in general consists of 15,000 men. That's total which would include cooks, clerks, etc.
And a brigade can fluctuate greatly is in general around 1500 troops, in total.
So 5000/1500 = 3 1/3 brigades. Speed bump against 105,000 Russian troops they ain't there to stop Russia.
I would also note, even though it may be a minor point, they keep saying..... to "Eastern Europe" and not specially Ukraine. We have NATO allies in "eastern europe" but Ukraine isn't one of them.
Just some thoughts.
northern watch
TB Fanatic
CaryC
Has No Life - Lives on TB
That's like right now our time isn't it??????
northern watch
TB Fanatic
OldAndCrazy
Pureblood Forever
All that and keep in mind it takes 3+ folks in the rear to support each fighting man (or rainbow unicorn if that's how they identify).
vector7
Dot Collector
Will China and Russia invade simultaneously?
View: https://twitter.com/contrariansmind/status/1485662729578983425?s=20
View: https://twitter.com/contrariansmind/status/1485662729578983425?s=20
We Americans are blessed with short memories. During the Yugoslavian conflict I remember one of the ethnic groups had a battle cry that went back to a 13th century battle.
Echo 5
Funniest guy on TB2K
Not this time.
As the Russians make last second preparations to invade Ukraine, and perhaps the West, the Traitor in Chief releases FIVE more terrorists from Guantanamo. What fools, those that elected the Traitor, Biden… You DON’T deal with terrorists. NEVER, EVER, treat with terrorists…
OA
OA
danielboon
TB Fanatic
EndGameWW3
@EndGameWW3
·
23m
Americans being told not to travel to Russia... https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/russia-travel-advisory.html
@EndGameWW3
·
23m
Americans being told not to travel to Russia... https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/russia-travel-advisory.html
They arent going to Ukraine. They will go to NATO border countries.
Also keep in mind that it may not just be 5000 Americans but also 5K Brits, 10K Latvians, 20K Poles etc. They all add up. If they have actually trained enough for some decent comms and coordination they can make a sizeable force.
northern watch
TB Fanatic
adgal
Veteran Member
Why are we rushing to defend Ukraine?
The military-industrial complex and its clients sprinkled throughout both political parties seem to have decided that the next place we need to go and kill people is Ukraine, assuming that Russia decides to slice off a section of its former province.
www.washingtontimes.com
This is an excellent article about the lack of logic of the US defending Ukraine. It's behind a fire wall (and I've already used up my freebies this month), so if anyone else can click and copy - that would be awesome.
danielboon
TB Fanatic
EndGameWW3 Retweeted
Liveuamap
@Liveuamap
·
39m
NATO Secretary General
@jensstoltenberg
's met today with Foreign Ministers
@Haavisto
of Finland and
@AnnLinde
of Sweden https://baltics.liveuamap.com/en/2022/24-january-nato-secretary-general-jensstoltenbergs-met-today… via
@NATOpress
Liveuamap
@Liveuamap
·
39m
NATO Secretary General
@jensstoltenberg
's met today with Foreign Ministers
@Haavisto
of Finland and
@AnnLinde
of Sweden https://baltics.liveuamap.com/en/2022/24-january-nato-secretary-general-jensstoltenbergs-met-today… via
@NATOpress
155 arty
Veteran Member
it was 6 in Vietnam
now probably more like 8 - 1ratio
danielboon
TB Fanatic
EndGameWW3 Retweeted
Rehanna Jones
@RehannaJB
·
1h
NEW - #NATO is “considering to further enhance its presence in the eastern part of the Alliance. This could include the deployment of additional NATO battlegroups,” says
@jensstoltenberg
https://bit.ly/346WBdD
Rehanna Jones
@RehannaJB
·
1h
NEW - #NATO is “considering to further enhance its presence in the eastern part of the Alliance. This could include the deployment of additional NATO battlegroups,” says
@jensstoltenberg
https://bit.ly/346WBdD
northern watch
TB Fanatic
Hogwrench
Senior Member
Yeah. We are training wokeism and the ruskies are training shooting each other with live ammo.
northern watch
TB Fanatic
danielboon
TB Fanatic
Where are the protests by the left?
OldAndCrazy
Pureblood Forever
Cheese eatin' surrender monkeys!!!
danielboon
TB Fanatic
northern watch
TB Fanatic
northern watch
TB Fanatic
danielboon
TB Fanatic
EndGameWW3
@EndGameWW3
·
12m
Biden to speak with European leaders to discuss Russia-Ukraine tensions
@EndGameWW3
·
12m
Biden to speak with European leaders to discuss Russia-Ukraine tensions
northern watch
TB Fanatic
Russia Planning "Lightning War" To Take Out Ukraine's Capital: UK's Johnson In Dramatic Claim
BY TYLER DURDEN
ZERO HEDGE
MONDAY, JAN 24, 2022 - 12:00 PM
As we detailed earlier, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell during Monday statements to the press appeared to openly mock the UK and US for their dramatic announcements of embassy personnel evacuations due to threat of a Russian invasion of Ukraine. He said there's no need to "dramatize" the situation given there's high hopes that ongoing diplomacy will prevail. Moscow too has continued to condemn what it called "disinformation hysteria" prevailing in the West, which is fueling the crisis further.
But it seems London is content to hype things further, with Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Monday citing "gloomy" intelligence from UK intel officials warning that Russia is planning a "lightning war" to take out Ukraine's capital of Kiev. Johnson said in a message directed at Russia that an offensive would be a "disastrous step" and "bloody business".
Getty Images
While confirming that some British diplomatic staff have begun to exit the embassy in Kiev and depart of the country, Johnson affirmed "We do think it prudent to make some changes now."
That's when he said in dramatic fashion...
He added during the comments that "from a Russian perspective, (it) is going to be a painful, violent and bloody business." He concluded with: "I think it’s very important that people in Russia understand that this could be a new Chechnya."
More than just issuing jingoist rhetoric, threats, and claims, the UK has over the past week been flying military plane-loads of weaponry into Kiev, something Russia has condemned as a highly dangerous escalation. This is mostly believed to be anti-take and anti-armor systems, missiles, and munitions.
Over the weekend the Kremlin accused Britain of unnecessarily stoking tensions even as London remained on the sidelines of the direct diplomacy currently taking place, which has involved talks between US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian FM Sergey Lavrov in Geneva. Further Normandy format talks will be held in Paris this week, involving the Russians, Ukrainians, French, and Germans. According to the news wires, Biden will also hold a call with European leaders today:
The New York Times had observed over the weekend that the UK has pursued a much "more muscular" stance on Russia in recent days. "Britain seized the world’s attention on Saturday by accusing President Vladimir Putin of plotting to install a pro-Russian leader in Ukraine, a dramatic late-night announcement that instantly thrust it on to the front lines of the most dangerous security crisis in Europe in decades," the Times wrote.
Russia has of course, denied both of these latest bombshell accusations, which included the following: "We have information that indicates the Russian Government is looking to install a pro-Russian leader in Kyiv as it considers whether to invade and occupy Ukraine," the UK statement published Saturday began. Interestingly, EU countries appear to be moving away from this type of charged rhetoric, also with NATO showing it's not ready to present a unified position of "military options" on the table, given especially Germany has lately broken with its Western allies on the question of arming Ukraine.
Russia Planning "Lightning War" To Take Out Ukraine's Capital: UK's Johnson In Dramatic Claim | ZeroHedge
BY TYLER DURDEN
ZERO HEDGE
MONDAY, JAN 24, 2022 - 12:00 PM
As we detailed earlier, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell during Monday statements to the press appeared to openly mock the UK and US for their dramatic announcements of embassy personnel evacuations due to threat of a Russian invasion of Ukraine. He said there's no need to "dramatize" the situation given there's high hopes that ongoing diplomacy will prevail. Moscow too has continued to condemn what it called "disinformation hysteria" prevailing in the West, which is fueling the crisis further.
But it seems London is content to hype things further, with Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Monday citing "gloomy" intelligence from UK intel officials warning that Russia is planning a "lightning war" to take out Ukraine's capital of Kiev. Johnson said in a message directed at Russia that an offensive would be a "disastrous step" and "bloody business".
Getty Images
While confirming that some British diplomatic staff have begun to exit the embassy in Kiev and depart of the country, Johnson affirmed "We do think it prudent to make some changes now."
That's when he said in dramatic fashion...
He added during the comments that "from a Russian perspective, (it) is going to be a painful, violent and bloody business." He concluded with: "I think it’s very important that people in Russia understand that this could be a new Chechnya."
More than just issuing jingoist rhetoric, threats, and claims, the UK has over the past week been flying military plane-loads of weaponry into Kiev, something Russia has condemned as a highly dangerous escalation. This is mostly believed to be anti-take and anti-armor systems, missiles, and munitions.
Over the weekend the Kremlin accused Britain of unnecessarily stoking tensions even as London remained on the sidelines of the direct diplomacy currently taking place, which has involved talks between US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian FM Sergey Lavrov in Geneva. Further Normandy format talks will be held in Paris this week, involving the Russians, Ukrainians, French, and Germans. According to the news wires, Biden will also hold a call with European leaders today:
The New York Times had observed over the weekend that the UK has pursued a much "more muscular" stance on Russia in recent days. "Britain seized the world’s attention on Saturday by accusing President Vladimir Putin of plotting to install a pro-Russian leader in Ukraine, a dramatic late-night announcement that instantly thrust it on to the front lines of the most dangerous security crisis in Europe in decades," the Times wrote.
Russia has of course, denied both of these latest bombshell accusations, which included the following: "We have information that indicates the Russian Government is looking to install a pro-Russian leader in Kyiv as it considers whether to invade and occupy Ukraine," the UK statement published Saturday began. Interestingly, EU countries appear to be moving away from this type of charged rhetoric, also with NATO showing it's not ready to present a unified position of "military options" on the table, given especially Germany has lately broken with its Western allies on the question of arming Ukraine.
Russia Planning "Lightning War" To Take Out Ukraine's Capital: UK's Johnson In Dramatic Claim | ZeroHedge
Mark D
Now running for Emperor.
Hmmm... They are actually flirting with proper spacing in that first pic; much improved from a couple months ago. Those guys with funny green hats have been busy.
It’s all where you place your pieces on the game board. Put ‘em on the wrong place, and you have unadulterated carnage. Bidet thinks of this all as a game on a pretty board. He doesn’t give a shit about anyone, other than his Family Crime Cabal… Just remember, Putin and the Russians are going all in, if Vlad gets mad… If so, ALL of our enemies will come to visit, as well as go for our allies- what few of them are left…
OA
northern watch
TB Fanatic
NATO to put more forces on standby amid fears of Russian attack on Ukraine
The U.S. has also ordered diplomats families to leave its embassy in Ukraine.
By Patrick Reevell
ABC News
24 January 2022, 09:52
US evacuating diplomats from Ukraine embassy
The State Department urged diplomats, non-essential personnel and their families to depart the U.S. embassy in Kyiv amid heightened fears of a Russian attack on the country.
Gleb Garanich/Reuters
KYIV, Ukraine -- Amid deepening anxiety over a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine, the United States announced it's pulling out diplomats' families and some staff from its embassy in the country. Meanwhile, NATO announced it was putting extra forces on standby.
As Russia continues to mass tens of thousands of troops close to Ukraine's borders, NATO said the alliance was sending a small number of ships and fighter jets to Eastern Europe to strengthen its "deterrence" presence there and reassure its eastern members,
Denmark is sending a frigate to the Baltic Sea and four F-16 warplanes to Lithuania. At the same time, France is ready to send troops to Romania under NATO command, and Spain is considering deploying fighter jets to Bulgaria, NATO said in a statement. The Netherlands has agreed to send two F-35 jets to Bulgaria and has put a ship and land-based forces on standby for a NATO response force, officials said.
"NATO will continue to take all necessary measures to protect and defend all Allies, including by reinforcing the eastern part of the Alliance," NATO's Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said in a statement.
The NATO announcement coincided with a report in The New York Times that the Biden administration may be preparing to send up to 5,000 American troops to Eastern European members of the alliance.
Mauricio Campino/U.S. Air Force via Reuters
Airman 1st Class Olabode Igandan palletizes ammunition, weapons and other equipment bound for Ukraine during a foreign military sales mission at Dover Air Force Base, in Delaware, January 21, 2022. Picture taken January 21, 2022.
The White House and the Pentagon have not confirmed the report, though the administration has previously said sending more U.S. troops to Eastern Europe is on the table if Russia attacks Ukraine.
NATO on Monday said the "United States has also made clear that it is considering increasing its military presence in the eastern part of the Alliance."
The steps to boost NATO's readiness came as the U.S. State Department announced Sunday it was ordering the families of its diplomats at its embassy in Ukraine's capital Kyiv to leave the country over security fears.
MORE: US preparing to approve evacuation from embassy in Ukraine: Sources
The State Department said it has also authorized non-emergency staff at the embassy to depart voluntarily.
The United Kingdom on Monday followed suit, with its Foreign Office saying some embassy staff and their dependents would be withdrawn "in response to the growing threat from Russia."
Ukraine's government criticized the U.S. evacuation calling them "premature" and "excessively cautious."
"While we respect right of foreign nations to ensure safety & security of their diplomatic missions, we believe such a step to be a premature one & an instance of excessive caution," Oleg Nikolenko, a spokesman for Ukraine's foreign ministry, tweeted.
Sean Gallup/Getty Images
Civilian participants train in a forest on Jan. 22, 2022 in Kyiv, Ukraine. Across Ukraine thousands of civilians are participating in such groups to receive basic combat training and in time of war, would be under direct command of the Ukrainian military.
Ukrainian officials are unhappy with the message the evacuations send by suggesting that a Russian invasion could be imminent. In general, they are much more skeptical that Russia is planning to launch a major attack and worry that western countries risk helping Moscow by exaggerating the risk and spreading panic.
Privately, American officials acknowledge there is a gap between the Ukrainian and U.S. assessment of the level of threat. Speaking on condition of anonymity, a U.S. official told ABC News this weekend that Ukraine was "p----- off" over the evacuations.
A senior State Department official on Sunday insisted the embassy drawdown did not undermine America's commitment to Ukraine, saying they were just "prudent precautions" given the heightened fear of a Russian attack.
The official said the decision was "based on this military buildup, based on how we see these developments," calling it the "right moment."
Those leaving the embassy will do so on commercial flights, the State Department has said, indicating it is not an emergency evacuation.
The State Department were scarred by the chaotic evacuation of Afghanistan, where thousands of Americans were stranded after the sudden Taliban takeover there caught the U.S. off guard. Officials are anxious to avoid a similar situation in Ukraine, should the worst happen.
Russia has repeatedly insisted it has no intention of attacking Ukraine. However, its military buildup continues near Ukraine's eastern border and now in Belarus, where trainloads of Russian tanks and artillery have been arriving for joint exercises there.
Gleb Garanich/Reuters
A security guard speaks on a mobile phone outside the U.S. embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine, Jan. 24, 2022. The United States said in a statement it was ordering the departure of eligible family members of staff from its embassy in Ukraine and said all citizens should consider leaving due to the threat of military action from Russia.
A top commander of Russian-controlled separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine on Monday also accused Ukraine's military of preparing to launch an offensive against the separatist areas.
The U.S. and Ukraine are concerned that a false claim of a Ukrainian offensive against the separatists could be used as a pretext for Russia to launch an invasion.
Eduard Basurin, the head of the militia of the separatists' self-declared 'People's Republic of Donetsk' (DNR), in local media warned it "firmly recommends the enemy to give up its criminal intentions," promising the Ukrainian army "will suffer irreparable damage, after which it will not be able to recover."
Ukraine's government has insisted it will not launch any offensive and there is no evidence Ukraine is preparing to.
NATO to put more forces on standby amid fears of Russian attack on Ukraine - ABC News (go.com)
The U.S. has also ordered diplomats families to leave its embassy in Ukraine.
By Patrick Reevell
ABC News
24 January 2022, 09:52
US evacuating diplomats from Ukraine embassy
The State Department urged diplomats, non-essential personnel and their families to depart the U.S. embassy in Kyiv amid heightened fears of a Russian attack on the country.
Gleb Garanich/Reuters
KYIV, Ukraine -- Amid deepening anxiety over a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine, the United States announced it's pulling out diplomats' families and some staff from its embassy in the country. Meanwhile, NATO announced it was putting extra forces on standby.
As Russia continues to mass tens of thousands of troops close to Ukraine's borders, NATO said the alliance was sending a small number of ships and fighter jets to Eastern Europe to strengthen its "deterrence" presence there and reassure its eastern members,
Denmark is sending a frigate to the Baltic Sea and four F-16 warplanes to Lithuania. At the same time, France is ready to send troops to Romania under NATO command, and Spain is considering deploying fighter jets to Bulgaria, NATO said in a statement. The Netherlands has agreed to send two F-35 jets to Bulgaria and has put a ship and land-based forces on standby for a NATO response force, officials said.
"NATO will continue to take all necessary measures to protect and defend all Allies, including by reinforcing the eastern part of the Alliance," NATO's Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said in a statement.
The NATO announcement coincided with a report in The New York Times that the Biden administration may be preparing to send up to 5,000 American troops to Eastern European members of the alliance.
Airman 1st Class Olabode Igandan palletizes ammunition, weapons and other equipment bound for Ukraine during a foreign military sales mission at Dover Air Force Base, in Delaware, January 21, 2022. Picture taken January 21, 2022.
The White House and the Pentagon have not confirmed the report, though the administration has previously said sending more U.S. troops to Eastern Europe is on the table if Russia attacks Ukraine.
NATO on Monday said the "United States has also made clear that it is considering increasing its military presence in the eastern part of the Alliance."
The steps to boost NATO's readiness came as the U.S. State Department announced Sunday it was ordering the families of its diplomats at its embassy in Ukraine's capital Kyiv to leave the country over security fears.
MORE: US preparing to approve evacuation from embassy in Ukraine: Sources
The State Department said it has also authorized non-emergency staff at the embassy to depart voluntarily.
The United Kingdom on Monday followed suit, with its Foreign Office saying some embassy staff and their dependents would be withdrawn "in response to the growing threat from Russia."
Ukraine's government criticized the U.S. evacuation calling them "premature" and "excessively cautious."
"While we respect right of foreign nations to ensure safety & security of their diplomatic missions, we believe such a step to be a premature one & an instance of excessive caution," Oleg Nikolenko, a spokesman for Ukraine's foreign ministry, tweeted.
Civilian participants train in a forest on Jan. 22, 2022 in Kyiv, Ukraine. Across Ukraine thousands of civilians are participating in such groups to receive basic combat training and in time of war, would be under direct command of the Ukrainian military.
Ukrainian officials are unhappy with the message the evacuations send by suggesting that a Russian invasion could be imminent. In general, they are much more skeptical that Russia is planning to launch a major attack and worry that western countries risk helping Moscow by exaggerating the risk and spreading panic.
Privately, American officials acknowledge there is a gap between the Ukrainian and U.S. assessment of the level of threat. Speaking on condition of anonymity, a U.S. official told ABC News this weekend that Ukraine was "p----- off" over the evacuations.
A senior State Department official on Sunday insisted the embassy drawdown did not undermine America's commitment to Ukraine, saying they were just "prudent precautions" given the heightened fear of a Russian attack.
The official said the decision was "based on this military buildup, based on how we see these developments," calling it the "right moment."
Those leaving the embassy will do so on commercial flights, the State Department has said, indicating it is not an emergency evacuation.
The State Department were scarred by the chaotic evacuation of Afghanistan, where thousands of Americans were stranded after the sudden Taliban takeover there caught the U.S. off guard. Officials are anxious to avoid a similar situation in Ukraine, should the worst happen.
Russia has repeatedly insisted it has no intention of attacking Ukraine. However, its military buildup continues near Ukraine's eastern border and now in Belarus, where trainloads of Russian tanks and artillery have been arriving for joint exercises there.
A security guard speaks on a mobile phone outside the U.S. embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine, Jan. 24, 2022. The United States said in a statement it was ordering the departure of eligible family members of staff from its embassy in Ukraine and said all citizens should consider leaving due to the threat of military action from Russia.
A top commander of Russian-controlled separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine on Monday also accused Ukraine's military of preparing to launch an offensive against the separatist areas.
The U.S. and Ukraine are concerned that a false claim of a Ukrainian offensive against the separatists could be used as a pretext for Russia to launch an invasion.
Eduard Basurin, the head of the militia of the separatists' self-declared 'People's Republic of Donetsk' (DNR), in local media warned it "firmly recommends the enemy to give up its criminal intentions," promising the Ukrainian army "will suffer irreparable damage, after which it will not be able to recover."
Ukraine's government has insisted it will not launch any offensive and there is no evidence Ukraine is preparing to.
NATO to put more forces on standby amid fears of Russian attack on Ukraine - ABC News (go.com)
Seeker22
Has No Life - Lives on TB
OldAndCrazy
Pureblood Forever
He should be found....Never forget this asshole (the Pride of West Point)
northern watch
TB Fanatic
Global Affairs Canada suffers ‘cyber attack’ amid Russia-Ukraine tensions: sources
Alex Boutilier and Mercedes Stephenson
Global News
January 24 2022
2 hrs ago
Global Affairs Canada is scrambling to recover after a multi-day network disruption that security and government sources describe as a “cyber attack.”
© THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward Global Affairs Canada, the department leading Ottawa's response to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, has experienced significant network disruptions over the weekend.
While neither Global Affairs nor Canada’s cyber security agency, the Communications Security Establishment, could immediately comment, sources tell Global News the government is concerned the attack was conducted by Russia or Russian-backed hackers.
"GAC has been the target of a cyber attack but it is not clear if the Russians, the alleged perpetrators, hacked into the system or were able to merely disrupt its service," a national security source, who spoke on the condition they not be named, told Global News.
The Liberal government has been vocal in its support for Ukraine as Russia masses troops on the former Soviet state’s borders, with Ottawa announcing a $120 million loan to the Ukrainian government last week and re-committing Canadian soldiers to train Kyiv’s security forces.
According to one source, the disruptions at Global Affairs appear to have begun Friday and continued throughout the weekend. As of Monday morning, government cyber security officials were still working to resolve the situation.
Global Affairs has been at the forefront of Ottawa’s pressure campaign against another Russian incursion into Ukrainian territory, with Minister Mélanie Joly spending most of last week meeting with officials in Kyiv.
Late Wednesday evening, the CSE published an updated cyber threat bulletin warning Canadian organizations to bolster their defences.
“(The CSE) is aware of foreign cyber threat activities, including by Russian-backed actors, to target Canadian critical infrastructure network operators, their operational and information technology,” the bulletin read.
When asked if the bulletin was issued in response to a spike in observed cyber-attacks, including by Russian-backed actors, a spokesperson for CSE told Global News they could not discuss the matter for “operational security reasons.”
But the CSE said the bulletin was partially an attempt to “raise awareness and draw further attention to known Russian-backed cyber threat activity, including the tactics, techniques and procedures used to target operational and information technology.”
It’s unlikely that Global Affairs missed the memo. The department works closely with the CSE, given the agency’s mandate to collect foreign intelligence and launch cyber attacks against foreign adversaries.
The CSE’s warning also referenced its assessment, made in 2021, that foreign-backed hackers have made incursions into Canadian critical infrastructure, manufacturing, health and energy networks. The agency assessed it unlikely that foreign states would attempt to disrupt those critical sectors “in the absence of international hostilities.”
With more than 100,000 Russian troops massing on Ukraine’s border, and with diplomatic attempts to stave off an invasion faltering, international hostilities seem more probable than when the CSE initially made that warning.
Speaking to reporters Monday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said how the Canadian government can further assist Ukraine will be on the agenda as the Liberal cabinet begins a three-day retreat.
“We’re going to continue to be there to respond in ways that we can, to support Ukraine. This is something that matters deeply to us,” Trudeau said.
Global Affairs Canada suffers ‘cyber attack’ amid Russia-Ukraine tensions: sources (msn.com)
Alex Boutilier and Mercedes Stephenson
Global News
January 24 2022
2 hrs ago
Global Affairs Canada is scrambling to recover after a multi-day network disruption that security and government sources describe as a “cyber attack.”
© THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward Global Affairs Canada, the department leading Ottawa's response to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, has experienced significant network disruptions over the weekend.
While neither Global Affairs nor Canada’s cyber security agency, the Communications Security Establishment, could immediately comment, sources tell Global News the government is concerned the attack was conducted by Russia or Russian-backed hackers.
"GAC has been the target of a cyber attack but it is not clear if the Russians, the alleged perpetrators, hacked into the system or were able to merely disrupt its service," a national security source, who spoke on the condition they not be named, told Global News.
The Liberal government has been vocal in its support for Ukraine as Russia masses troops on the former Soviet state’s borders, with Ottawa announcing a $120 million loan to the Ukrainian government last week and re-committing Canadian soldiers to train Kyiv’s security forces.
According to one source, the disruptions at Global Affairs appear to have begun Friday and continued throughout the weekend. As of Monday morning, government cyber security officials were still working to resolve the situation.
Global Affairs has been at the forefront of Ottawa’s pressure campaign against another Russian incursion into Ukrainian territory, with Minister Mélanie Joly spending most of last week meeting with officials in Kyiv.
Late Wednesday evening, the CSE published an updated cyber threat bulletin warning Canadian organizations to bolster their defences.
“(The CSE) is aware of foreign cyber threat activities, including by Russian-backed actors, to target Canadian critical infrastructure network operators, their operational and information technology,” the bulletin read.
When asked if the bulletin was issued in response to a spike in observed cyber-attacks, including by Russian-backed actors, a spokesperson for CSE told Global News they could not discuss the matter for “operational security reasons.”
But the CSE said the bulletin was partially an attempt to “raise awareness and draw further attention to known Russian-backed cyber threat activity, including the tactics, techniques and procedures used to target operational and information technology.”
It’s unlikely that Global Affairs missed the memo. The department works closely with the CSE, given the agency’s mandate to collect foreign intelligence and launch cyber attacks against foreign adversaries.
The CSE’s warning also referenced its assessment, made in 2021, that foreign-backed hackers have made incursions into Canadian critical infrastructure, manufacturing, health and energy networks. The agency assessed it unlikely that foreign states would attempt to disrupt those critical sectors “in the absence of international hostilities.”
With more than 100,000 Russian troops massing on Ukraine’s border, and with diplomatic attempts to stave off an invasion faltering, international hostilities seem more probable than when the CSE initially made that warning.
Speaking to reporters Monday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said how the Canadian government can further assist Ukraine will be on the agenda as the Liberal cabinet begins a three-day retreat.
“We’re going to continue to be there to respond in ways that we can, to support Ukraine. This is something that matters deeply to us,” Trudeau said.
Global Affairs Canada suffers ‘cyber attack’ amid Russia-Ukraine tensions: sources (msn.com)
vector7
Dot Collector
Russia and China’s Plans For A New World Order
January 22 2022
For Moscow and Beijing, the Ukraine crisis is part of a struggle to reduce American power and make the world safe for autocrats
The western alliance has threatened the Kremlin with “massive” and “unprecedented” sanctions if Russia attacks Ukraine. But, as the Ukraine crisis reaches boiling point, western efforts to isolate and punish Russia are likely to be undermined by the support of China — Russia’s giant neighbour.
For Moscow and Beijing, the Ukraine crisis is part of a struggle to reduce American power and make the world safe for autocrats © Evgeniy Paulin, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool/AP Share on twitter (opens new window) Share on facebook (opens new window) Share on linkedin (opens new window) Gideon Rachman January 22 2022 817 Print this page Receive free Geopolitics updates We’ll send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding up the latest Geopolitics news every morning. The western alliance has threatened the Kremlin with “massive” and “unprecedented” sanctions if Russia attacks Ukraine. But, as the Ukraine crisis reaches boiling point, western efforts to isolate and punish Russia are likely to be undermined by the support of China — Russia’s giant neighbour. When Vladimir Putin travels to Beijing for the beginning of the Winter Olympics on February 4, the Russian president will meet the leader who has become his most important ally — Xi Jinping of China. In a phone call between Putin and Xi in December, the Chinese leader supported Russia’s demand that Ukraine must never join Nato. A decade ago, such a relationship seemed unlikely: China and Russia were as much rivals as partners.
But after a period when both countries have sparred persistently with the US, Xi’s support for Putin reflects a growing identity between the interests and world views of Moscow and Beijing. According to the Chinese media, Xi told Putin that “certain international forces are arbitrarily interfering in the internal affairs of China and Russia, under the guise of democracy and human rights”. As Xi’s remarks to Putin made clear, the Russian and Chinese leaders are united by a belief that the US is plotting to undermine and overthrow their governments.
In the heyday of communism, Russia and China supported revolutionary forces around the world. But today Moscow and Beijing have embraced the rhetoric of counter-revolution. When unrest broke out in Kazakhstan recently, Putin accused the US of attempting to sponsor a “colour revolution” — a term given to protest movements that seek to change the government — in a country that borders both Russia and China. Senior Chinese ministers echoed those remarks.
Washington’s hidden hand
As Russia and China see it, the uprising in Kazakhstan fitted a pattern. The Kremlin has long argued that the US was the hidden hand behind Ukraine’s Maidan uprising of 2013-14, in which a pro-Russian leader was overthrown. China also insists that foreign forces — for which, read the US — were behind the huge Hong Kong protests of 2019, which were eventually ended by a crackdown ordered from Beijing. A convoy of Russian armoured vehicles moves along a highway in Crimea, January 18
Both Putin and Xi have also made it clear they believe that America’s ultimate goal is to overthrow the Russian and Chinese governments and that local pro-democracy forces are America’s Trojan horse. In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson of the US talked of “making the world safe for democracy”. In 2022, Putin and Xi are determined to make the world safe for autocracy.
The ambitions of Russia and China, however, are far from being wholly defensive. Both Putin and Xi have also made it clear they believe that America’s ultimate goal is to overthrow the Russian and Chinese governments and that local pro-democracy forces are America’s Trojan horse. In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson of the US talked of “making the world safe for democracy”.
In 2022, Putin and Xi are determined to make the world safe for autocracy. The ambitions of Russia and China, however, are far from being wholly defensive. Both Putin and Xi believe that their vulnerability to “colour revolutions” stems from fundamental flaws in the current world order — the combination of institutions, ideas and power structures that determines how global politics plays out. As a result, they share a determination to create a new world order that will better accommodate the interests of Russia and China — as defined by their current leaders.
Two features of the current world order that the Russians and the Chinese frequently object to are “unipolarity” and “universality”. Put more simply, they believe that the current arrangements give America too much power — and they are determined to change that.
“Unipolarity” means that, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world was left with only one superpower — the US. Fyodor Lukyanov, a Russian foreign-policy thinker who is close to President Putin, believes that unipolarity “gave the United States the ability and possibility to do whatever it saw fit on the world stage”. He argues that the new age of American hegemony was ushered in by the Gulf war of 1991 — in which the US assembled a global coalition to drive Saddam Hussein’s Iraq out of Kuwait.
The Gulf war was followed by a succession of US-led military interventions around the world — including in Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s. Nato’s bombing of Belgrade, Serbia’s capital, in 1999, has long formed part of Russia’s argument that Nato is not a purely defensive alliance. The fact that Nato bombs also struck the Chinese embassy in Belgrade has not been forgotten in Beijing. Pro-democracy protesters react as police fire water cannon outside the government headquarters in Hong Kong on September 15 2019
After the 9/11 terror attacks on New York and Washington, Nato invoked Article 5 — its mutual-defence clause — and invaded Afghanistan. Once again, according to Lukyanov, America had demonstrated its willingness and ability to “forcefully transform the world”.
But America’s defeat in Afghanistan, symbolised by the chaotic withdrawal from Kabul in the summer of 2021, has given the Russians hope that the US-led world order is crumbling. Lukyanov argues that the fall of Kabul to the Taliban was “no less historical and symbolic than the fall of the Berlin Wall”.
Influential Chinese academics are thinking along similar lines. Yan Xuetong, dean of the school of international relations at Tsinghua University in Beijing (Xi’s alma mater), writes that “China believes that its rise to great-power status entitles it to a new role in world affairs — one that cannot be reconciled with unquestioned US dominance.”
Like Lukyanov, Yan believes that “the US-led world order is fading away . . . In its place will come a multipolar order”. President Xi himself has put it even more succinctly with his often repeated claim that “the east is rising and the west is declining”.
For Russia and China, the making of a new world order is not simply a matter of raw power. It is also a battle of ideas. While the western liberal tradition promotes the idea of universal human rights, Russian and Chinese thinkers make the argument that different cultural traditions and “civilisations” should be allowed to develop in different ways.
Vladislav Surkov, once an influential adviser to Putin, has decried Russia’s “repeated fruitless efforts to become a part of western civilisation”. Instead, according to Surkov, Russia should embrace the idea that it has “absorbed both east and west” and has a “hybrid mentality”. In a similar vein, pro-government thinkers in Beijing argue that a fusion of Confucianism and communism means that China will always be a country that stresses collective rather than individual rights. They claim that China’s success in containing Covid-19 reflects the superiority of the Chinese emphasis on collective action and group rights. President Vladimir Putin and Valdai Club research director Fyodor Lukyanov attend the plenary session of the 16th annual meeting titled “The Dawn of the East and the World Political Order” in 2019
Fyodor Lukyanov, right, a foreign-policy thinker close to Putin, believes the collapse of the USSR gave the US permission to do what it liked on the world stage © Mikhail Klimentyev/TASS
Beijing and Moscow argue that the current world order is characterised by an American attempt to impose western ideas about democracy and human rights on other countries, if necessary through military intervention. The new world order that Russia and China are demanding would instead be based on distinct spheres of influence. The US would accept Russian and Chinese domination of their neighbourhoods and would abandon its support for democracy or the colour revolutions that might threaten the Putin or Xi regimes.
The crisis over Ukraine is a struggle over the future world order because it turns on precisely these issues. For Putin, Ukraine is culturally and politically part of Russia’s sphere of influence. Russia’s security needs should give it the right to veto any Ukrainian desire to join Nato, the western alliance. Moscow also demands to act as the protector of Russian speakers. For the US, these demands violate some basic principles of the current world order — in particular, the right of an independent country to define its own foreign policy and strategic choices.
The Ukraine crisis is also about “world order” because it has clear global implications. The US knows that if Russia attacks Ukraine and establishes its own “sphere of influence”, a precedent will be set for China. During the Xi era, China has built military bases all over contested areas of the South China Sea. Beijing’s threats to invade Taiwan — a self-governing democratic island that China regards as a rebel province — have also become more overt and frequent. If Putin succeeds in invading Ukraine, the temptation for Xi to attack Taiwan will rise, as will the domestic pressure on the Chinese leader from excitable nationalists, sensing the end of the American era.
Russia and China clearly have similar complaints about the current world order. There are also some important differences between the approaches of Moscow and Beijing. Russia is currently more willing to take military risks than China. But its ultimate goals may be more limited. For the Russians, the use of military force in Syria, Ukraine and elsewhere is a way of repudiating the claim made by former US president Barack Obama that Russia is now no more than a regional power. Dmitri Trenin of the Carnegie Center in Moscow argues that, “For the country’s leaders, Russia is nothing if it is not a great power.”
But while Russia aspires to be one of the world’s great powers, China seems to be contemplating displacing the US as the world’s pre-eminent power. Elizabeth Economy, author of a new book called The World According to China, argues that Beijing is aiming for a “radically transformed international order” in which the US is in essence pushed out of the Pacific and becomes merely an Atlantic power. Since the Indo-Pacific is now the core of the global economy, that would essentially leave China as “number one”. Rush Doshi, a China scholar working in the White House, makes a similar argument in his book, The Long Game. Citing various Chinese sources, Doshi makes the case that China is now clearly aiming for American-style global hegemony.
A view of the burning World Trade Center towers from Park Place Street and West Broadway Avenue during the deadly terrorist attacks of September 11 2001 The 9/11 terror attacks led to Nato invoking Article 5 and invading Afghanistan, showing US willingness to ‘forcefully transform the world’ © Jose Jimenez/Primera Hora/Getty Images
American soldiers hide behind a barricade during an explosion, prior to fighting with Taliban forces on November 26 2001 at the fortress near Mazar-e-Sharif, northern Afghanistan US forces battle the Taliban in 2001. America’s final defeat in Afghanistan last year has given Moscow hope the US-led world order is crumbling © Oleg Nikishin/Getty Images
A bid for global supremacy
The difference in the scale of the ambitions of China and Russia reflects the difference in their economic potential. Russia’s economy is now roughly the size of Italy’s. Moscow simply does not have the wealth to sustain a bid for global supremacy. By contrast, China is now, by some measures, the world’s largest economy. It is also the world’s largest manufacturer and exporter. Its population of 1.4bn people is roughly ten times that of Russia. As a result, it is realistic for China to aspire to be the most powerful country in the world.
But while the differences in the economic potential of Russia and China makes Xi ultimately more ambitious than Putin, in the short term it also makes him more cautious. There is something of a gambler’s desperation in Putin’s willingness to use military force to try to change the balance of power in Europe. Trenin argues that, having seen Nato expand into much of what was once the Soviet bloc, Putin sees Ukraine as his “last stand”.
As America has become more protectionist, China has also used its trading power to expand its global influence. This month has seen the launch of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, a vast new free-trade area in the Asia-Pacific that includes China and several American strategic allies, such as Japan and Australia — which the US is not taking part in. Granting or withholding access to the Chinese market gives Beijing a tool of influence that is simply not available to Moscow.
But will gradualism work? Or do Russia and China need some kind of dramatic moment to create the new world order that they seek?
History suggests that new governing systems for the world generally emerge after some kind of seismic political event, such as a major war.
Much of the security and institutional architecture of the current world order emerged as the second world war was closing or in its aftermath, when the UN, the World Bank and the IMF were set up and their headquarters were situated in the US. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Gatt) came into force in 1948. Nato was created in 1949. The US-Japan Security Treaty was signed in 1951. The European Coal and Steel Community, the forerunner of the EU, was also founded in 1951. After the end of the cold war, rival Soviet-backed institutions such as the Warsaw Pact collapsed and Nato and the EU expanded up to the borders of Russia. China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, the successor to the Gatt.
The question now is whether Russia and China’s ambitions for a “new world order” will also need a war to come to fruition. A direct conflict with the US is simply too dangerous in the nuclear era and will not happen unless all sides miscalculate badly (which is always possible).
Iranian, Russia and Chinese warships during a joint military drill in the Indian ocean in January 2021 Iranian, Russia and Chinese warships on a military drill in the Indian Ocean last year. Will Russia and China’s ambitions for a ‘new world order’ need a war to come to fruition? © Iranian Army office/AFP/Getty Images
Russia and China may, however, feel that they will be able to achieve their ambitions through proxy wars. An unopposed Russian victory in Ukraine might signal that a new security order was emerging in Europe, involving a de facto Russian “sphere of influence”. A successful Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be widely read as a sign that the era of American dominance of the Pacific was over. At that point, many countries in the region that currently look to the US for their security, such as Japan and South Korea, might choose to accommodate themselves to a new China-dominated order.
Alternatively, a new world order might emerge through tacit acquiescence from Washington. That outcome does not seem likely with the Biden administration in power, unless there are some dramatic last-minute concessions from the US over Ukraine. But Donald Trump could return to the White House in 2024. At least rhetorically, he seems sympathetic to aspects of the Russian-Chinese world view. The former US president sometimes denigrated Nato and suggested that America’s allies in Asia were free-riders. His “America First” philosophy eschewed traditional language about an American mission to support freedom around the world. At times, Trump was also frank in expressing admiration for both Xi and Putin. And, as a self-proclaimed dealmaker, Trump is sympathetic to ideas of spheres of influence.
Vladimir Putin reviews a military honour guard with Chinese President Xi Jinping during a welcoming ceremony outside the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on June 8 2018 The ever closer Chinese-Russian alliance will ensure the threat to the US-led world order will not disappear any time soon © Greg Baker/AFP/Getty Images
Yet Russia and China do not seem inclined to sit back and wait for Trump to return to the White House. They know that even Trump’s Republican party includes many hawks, intent on confrontation with both Russia and China. In any case, a great deal can happen between now and the next presidential election in November 2024.
Russia’s impatience is clear from Putin’s willingness to force a crisis over Ukraine. The prospects for a new world order that is more congenial to Russia may depend on whether his Ukrainian gamble works. But even if Putin fails to achieve his goals in Ukraine, the threat to the US-led world order will not disappear. A rising China, led by an ambitious President Xi, will make sure of that.
https: //www.ft.com/content/d307ab6e-57b3-4007-9188-ec9717c60023
January 22 2022
For Moscow and Beijing, the Ukraine crisis is part of a struggle to reduce American power and make the world safe for autocrats
The western alliance has threatened the Kremlin with “massive” and “unprecedented” sanctions if Russia attacks Ukraine. But, as the Ukraine crisis reaches boiling point, western efforts to isolate and punish Russia are likely to be undermined by the support of China — Russia’s giant neighbour.
For Moscow and Beijing, the Ukraine crisis is part of a struggle to reduce American power and make the world safe for autocrats © Evgeniy Paulin, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool/AP Share on twitter (opens new window) Share on facebook (opens new window) Share on linkedin (opens new window) Gideon Rachman January 22 2022 817 Print this page Receive free Geopolitics updates We’ll send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding up the latest Geopolitics news every morning. The western alliance has threatened the Kremlin with “massive” and “unprecedented” sanctions if Russia attacks Ukraine. But, as the Ukraine crisis reaches boiling point, western efforts to isolate and punish Russia are likely to be undermined by the support of China — Russia’s giant neighbour. When Vladimir Putin travels to Beijing for the beginning of the Winter Olympics on February 4, the Russian president will meet the leader who has become his most important ally — Xi Jinping of China. In a phone call between Putin and Xi in December, the Chinese leader supported Russia’s demand that Ukraine must never join Nato. A decade ago, such a relationship seemed unlikely: China and Russia were as much rivals as partners.
But after a period when both countries have sparred persistently with the US, Xi’s support for Putin reflects a growing identity between the interests and world views of Moscow and Beijing. According to the Chinese media, Xi told Putin that “certain international forces are arbitrarily interfering in the internal affairs of China and Russia, under the guise of democracy and human rights”. As Xi’s remarks to Putin made clear, the Russian and Chinese leaders are united by a belief that the US is plotting to undermine and overthrow their governments.
In the heyday of communism, Russia and China supported revolutionary forces around the world. But today Moscow and Beijing have embraced the rhetoric of counter-revolution. When unrest broke out in Kazakhstan recently, Putin accused the US of attempting to sponsor a “colour revolution” — a term given to protest movements that seek to change the government — in a country that borders both Russia and China. Senior Chinese ministers echoed those remarks.
Washington’s hidden hand
As Russia and China see it, the uprising in Kazakhstan fitted a pattern. The Kremlin has long argued that the US was the hidden hand behind Ukraine’s Maidan uprising of 2013-14, in which a pro-Russian leader was overthrown. China also insists that foreign forces — for which, read the US — were behind the huge Hong Kong protests of 2019, which were eventually ended by a crackdown ordered from Beijing. A convoy of Russian armoured vehicles moves along a highway in Crimea, January 18
Both Putin and Xi have also made it clear they believe that America’s ultimate goal is to overthrow the Russian and Chinese governments and that local pro-democracy forces are America’s Trojan horse. In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson of the US talked of “making the world safe for democracy”. In 2022, Putin and Xi are determined to make the world safe for autocracy.
The ambitions of Russia and China, however, are far from being wholly defensive. Both Putin and Xi have also made it clear they believe that America’s ultimate goal is to overthrow the Russian and Chinese governments and that local pro-democracy forces are America’s Trojan horse. In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson of the US talked of “making the world safe for democracy”.
In 2022, Putin and Xi are determined to make the world safe for autocracy. The ambitions of Russia and China, however, are far from being wholly defensive. Both Putin and Xi believe that their vulnerability to “colour revolutions” stems from fundamental flaws in the current world order — the combination of institutions, ideas and power structures that determines how global politics plays out. As a result, they share a determination to create a new world order that will better accommodate the interests of Russia and China — as defined by their current leaders.
Two features of the current world order that the Russians and the Chinese frequently object to are “unipolarity” and “universality”. Put more simply, they believe that the current arrangements give America too much power — and they are determined to change that.
“Unipolarity” means that, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world was left with only one superpower — the US. Fyodor Lukyanov, a Russian foreign-policy thinker who is close to President Putin, believes that unipolarity “gave the United States the ability and possibility to do whatever it saw fit on the world stage”. He argues that the new age of American hegemony was ushered in by the Gulf war of 1991 — in which the US assembled a global coalition to drive Saddam Hussein’s Iraq out of Kuwait.
The Gulf war was followed by a succession of US-led military interventions around the world — including in Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s. Nato’s bombing of Belgrade, Serbia’s capital, in 1999, has long formed part of Russia’s argument that Nato is not a purely defensive alliance. The fact that Nato bombs also struck the Chinese embassy in Belgrade has not been forgotten in Beijing. Pro-democracy protesters react as police fire water cannon outside the government headquarters in Hong Kong on September 15 2019
After the 9/11 terror attacks on New York and Washington, Nato invoked Article 5 — its mutual-defence clause — and invaded Afghanistan. Once again, according to Lukyanov, America had demonstrated its willingness and ability to “forcefully transform the world”.
But America’s defeat in Afghanistan, symbolised by the chaotic withdrawal from Kabul in the summer of 2021, has given the Russians hope that the US-led world order is crumbling. Lukyanov argues that the fall of Kabul to the Taliban was “no less historical and symbolic than the fall of the Berlin Wall”.
Influential Chinese academics are thinking along similar lines. Yan Xuetong, dean of the school of international relations at Tsinghua University in Beijing (Xi’s alma mater), writes that “China believes that its rise to great-power status entitles it to a new role in world affairs — one that cannot be reconciled with unquestioned US dominance.”
Like Lukyanov, Yan believes that “the US-led world order is fading away . . . In its place will come a multipolar order”. President Xi himself has put it even more succinctly with his often repeated claim that “the east is rising and the west is declining”.
For Russia and China, the making of a new world order is not simply a matter of raw power. It is also a battle of ideas. While the western liberal tradition promotes the idea of universal human rights, Russian and Chinese thinkers make the argument that different cultural traditions and “civilisations” should be allowed to develop in different ways.
Vladislav Surkov, once an influential adviser to Putin, has decried Russia’s “repeated fruitless efforts to become a part of western civilisation”. Instead, according to Surkov, Russia should embrace the idea that it has “absorbed both east and west” and has a “hybrid mentality”. In a similar vein, pro-government thinkers in Beijing argue that a fusion of Confucianism and communism means that China will always be a country that stresses collective rather than individual rights. They claim that China’s success in containing Covid-19 reflects the superiority of the Chinese emphasis on collective action and group rights. President Vladimir Putin and Valdai Club research director Fyodor Lukyanov attend the plenary session of the 16th annual meeting titled “The Dawn of the East and the World Political Order” in 2019
Fyodor Lukyanov, right, a foreign-policy thinker close to Putin, believes the collapse of the USSR gave the US permission to do what it liked on the world stage © Mikhail Klimentyev/TASS
Beijing and Moscow argue that the current world order is characterised by an American attempt to impose western ideas about democracy and human rights on other countries, if necessary through military intervention. The new world order that Russia and China are demanding would instead be based on distinct spheres of influence. The US would accept Russian and Chinese domination of their neighbourhoods and would abandon its support for democracy or the colour revolutions that might threaten the Putin or Xi regimes.
The crisis over Ukraine is a struggle over the future world order because it turns on precisely these issues. For Putin, Ukraine is culturally and politically part of Russia’s sphere of influence. Russia’s security needs should give it the right to veto any Ukrainian desire to join Nato, the western alliance. Moscow also demands to act as the protector of Russian speakers. For the US, these demands violate some basic principles of the current world order — in particular, the right of an independent country to define its own foreign policy and strategic choices.
The Ukraine crisis is also about “world order” because it has clear global implications. The US knows that if Russia attacks Ukraine and establishes its own “sphere of influence”, a precedent will be set for China. During the Xi era, China has built military bases all over contested areas of the South China Sea. Beijing’s threats to invade Taiwan — a self-governing democratic island that China regards as a rebel province — have also become more overt and frequent. If Putin succeeds in invading Ukraine, the temptation for Xi to attack Taiwan will rise, as will the domestic pressure on the Chinese leader from excitable nationalists, sensing the end of the American era.
Russia and China clearly have similar complaints about the current world order. There are also some important differences between the approaches of Moscow and Beijing. Russia is currently more willing to take military risks than China. But its ultimate goals may be more limited. For the Russians, the use of military force in Syria, Ukraine and elsewhere is a way of repudiating the claim made by former US president Barack Obama that Russia is now no more than a regional power. Dmitri Trenin of the Carnegie Center in Moscow argues that, “For the country’s leaders, Russia is nothing if it is not a great power.”
But while Russia aspires to be one of the world’s great powers, China seems to be contemplating displacing the US as the world’s pre-eminent power. Elizabeth Economy, author of a new book called The World According to China, argues that Beijing is aiming for a “radically transformed international order” in which the US is in essence pushed out of the Pacific and becomes merely an Atlantic power. Since the Indo-Pacific is now the core of the global economy, that would essentially leave China as “number one”. Rush Doshi, a China scholar working in the White House, makes a similar argument in his book, The Long Game. Citing various Chinese sources, Doshi makes the case that China is now clearly aiming for American-style global hegemony.
A view of the burning World Trade Center towers from Park Place Street and West Broadway Avenue during the deadly terrorist attacks of September 11 2001 The 9/11 terror attacks led to Nato invoking Article 5 and invading Afghanistan, showing US willingness to ‘forcefully transform the world’ © Jose Jimenez/Primera Hora/Getty Images
American soldiers hide behind a barricade during an explosion, prior to fighting with Taliban forces on November 26 2001 at the fortress near Mazar-e-Sharif, northern Afghanistan US forces battle the Taliban in 2001. America’s final defeat in Afghanistan last year has given Moscow hope the US-led world order is crumbling © Oleg Nikishin/Getty Images
A bid for global supremacy
The difference in the scale of the ambitions of China and Russia reflects the difference in their economic potential. Russia’s economy is now roughly the size of Italy’s. Moscow simply does not have the wealth to sustain a bid for global supremacy. By contrast, China is now, by some measures, the world’s largest economy. It is also the world’s largest manufacturer and exporter. Its population of 1.4bn people is roughly ten times that of Russia. As a result, it is realistic for China to aspire to be the most powerful country in the world.
But while the differences in the economic potential of Russia and China makes Xi ultimately more ambitious than Putin, in the short term it also makes him more cautious. There is something of a gambler’s desperation in Putin’s willingness to use military force to try to change the balance of power in Europe. Trenin argues that, having seen Nato expand into much of what was once the Soviet bloc, Putin sees Ukraine as his “last stand”.
As America has become more protectionist, China has also used its trading power to expand its global influence. This month has seen the launch of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, a vast new free-trade area in the Asia-Pacific that includes China and several American strategic allies, such as Japan and Australia — which the US is not taking part in. Granting or withholding access to the Chinese market gives Beijing a tool of influence that is simply not available to Moscow.
But will gradualism work? Or do Russia and China need some kind of dramatic moment to create the new world order that they seek?
History suggests that new governing systems for the world generally emerge after some kind of seismic political event, such as a major war.
Much of the security and institutional architecture of the current world order emerged as the second world war was closing or in its aftermath, when the UN, the World Bank and the IMF were set up and their headquarters were situated in the US. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Gatt) came into force in 1948. Nato was created in 1949. The US-Japan Security Treaty was signed in 1951. The European Coal and Steel Community, the forerunner of the EU, was also founded in 1951. After the end of the cold war, rival Soviet-backed institutions such as the Warsaw Pact collapsed and Nato and the EU expanded up to the borders of Russia. China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, the successor to the Gatt.
The question now is whether Russia and China’s ambitions for a “new world order” will also need a war to come to fruition. A direct conflict with the US is simply too dangerous in the nuclear era and will not happen unless all sides miscalculate badly (which is always possible).
Iranian, Russia and Chinese warships during a joint military drill in the Indian ocean in January 2021 Iranian, Russia and Chinese warships on a military drill in the Indian Ocean last year. Will Russia and China’s ambitions for a ‘new world order’ need a war to come to fruition? © Iranian Army office/AFP/Getty Images
Russia and China may, however, feel that they will be able to achieve their ambitions through proxy wars. An unopposed Russian victory in Ukraine might signal that a new security order was emerging in Europe, involving a de facto Russian “sphere of influence”. A successful Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be widely read as a sign that the era of American dominance of the Pacific was over. At that point, many countries in the region that currently look to the US for their security, such as Japan and South Korea, might choose to accommodate themselves to a new China-dominated order.
Alternatively, a new world order might emerge through tacit acquiescence from Washington. That outcome does not seem likely with the Biden administration in power, unless there are some dramatic last-minute concessions from the US over Ukraine. But Donald Trump could return to the White House in 2024. At least rhetorically, he seems sympathetic to aspects of the Russian-Chinese world view. The former US president sometimes denigrated Nato and suggested that America’s allies in Asia were free-riders. His “America First” philosophy eschewed traditional language about an American mission to support freedom around the world. At times, Trump was also frank in expressing admiration for both Xi and Putin. And, as a self-proclaimed dealmaker, Trump is sympathetic to ideas of spheres of influence.
Vladimir Putin reviews a military honour guard with Chinese President Xi Jinping during a welcoming ceremony outside the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on June 8 2018 The ever closer Chinese-Russian alliance will ensure the threat to the US-led world order will not disappear any time soon © Greg Baker/AFP/Getty Images
Yet Russia and China do not seem inclined to sit back and wait for Trump to return to the White House. They know that even Trump’s Republican party includes many hawks, intent on confrontation with both Russia and China. In any case, a great deal can happen between now and the next presidential election in November 2024.
Russia’s impatience is clear from Putin’s willingness to force a crisis over Ukraine. The prospects for a new world order that is more congenial to Russia may depend on whether his Ukrainian gamble works. But even if Putin fails to achieve his goals in Ukraine, the threat to the US-led world order will not disappear. A rising China, led by an ambitious President Xi, will make sure of that.
https: //www.ft.com/content/d307ab6e-57b3-4007-9188-ec9717c60023
OldAndCrazy
Pureblood Forever
Jamming...only means one thing; invasion.
