American financial expert John Mauldin and George Friedman, the Director of a private intelligence and analysis company “Stratfor”, which is sometimes called the “shadow CIA”, in his article for the American Forbes explained why Russia is so important Ukraine in General and Crimea in particular.
I wouldn’t call this curious publication article. Rather, it is a compilation of illustrations — cards with extended captions. But this is the case when the illustration is much louder than many words.
The “signature dish” by George Friedman — geographical, but in a more narrow sense — the topographic features of regions that impact on their development and their purpose. We can say, on the basis of geography and it is their strategic forecasts (Stratfor — Strategic Forecasting). At least, it always emphasizes.
Unfortunately, in the new York times, there was no place for the main element of publication, so I found it necessary to fill this gap.
1. Russia practically has no outlet to the sea
Line St.-Petersburg — Rostov-na-Donu roughly delineates the Eastern border of the Baltic States, Belarus and Ukraine. Virtually any corner of the European Peninsula separated from the sea by a distance less than 300 miles. Most of the territory of Russia actually has no outlet to the sea. Russian major settlements are located at great distance from the Arctic ocean, and the few of the existing ports are mostly unusable in winter.
2. Europe controls Russia’s access to the oceans
In the European part of Russia there are three potential points from which to access the global system of Maritime trade. The first is through the Bosporus, which is under the control of Turkey and can be easily closed. Another is located in St. Petersburg, where the ships can sail through Danish waters, but this channel can be blocked. The third longest route in the Arctic. During the cold war military air base in Norway, Scotland and Iceland worked in conjunction with carrier strike groups to block Russia access to the sea.
Meanwhile, the country’s access to the seas is crucial for its economic and political power.
3. The Western boundary plays a key role for the Russian infrastructure
The main population of Russia is concentrated along its Western border with Europe and southern border with the Caucasus. Siberia is poorly populated.
Center for Russian agriculture tends to the South-Western part of the country. The Northern climate of Russia being unfavourable to agriculture, making the border with Ukraine, Caucasus and Central Asia are vital for Russia. As in the case of population, the West and the South of Russia represent the most important and productive areas of agricultural land.
Railway transport is oriented to the West and the former Soviet republics. The focus is on the West and South — only two train lines connect European Russia with the Pacific seaside region, and most of Siberia is not covered by the transport system.
Thus, the main crossing, which Russia is highly dependent, is on the West, the second center of gravity is located in the Caucasus. The European part – Russia, while the rest of the field to the East, in the Asian part, are its periphery.
4. Russia has lost its buffer against the West
As a military power Russia is very vulnerable. It takes European plain, where few natural barriers able to stop the enemy coming from the West. To the East of the Carpathian mountains, the plain turns to the South, and open doors to Russia.
With such intensive economic activity near the border and few natural barriers Russia is under threat. Therefore, it should not be surprising that its national strategy is to move its borders as far to the West. The first belt of countries on the Eastern edge of the European Peninsula — the Baltics, Belarus and Ukraine — provides a space through which Russia can defend itself and which provides additional economic opportunities.
In 1914, shortly before the outbreak of the First world war, Russia became engrossed in the first zone and some of the countries of the second, such as modern Poland and Romania. When in 1914 Germany and Austria-Hungary attacked Russia, the depth of this buffer allowed the Russians to resist outside Russia until 1917.
In 1941, when Germany again invaded Russia, its invasion was of a more radical nature. The Germans had seized almost the whole of the European Peninsula and its last beat sent to the East and South to the Caucasus. In the end, Russia defeated Germany, due to the vastness of the territories and steadfastness of his troops. If the Russians didn’t have this strategic depth, they would have lost the war.
Therefore, the strategy of Russia at the end of the Second world war was the promotion of its borders to the West as possible. It was the most massive expansion of Russia to the Western borders. Russia assumed the first belt of countries — the Baltics, Belarus and Ukraine — and has moved more to the West, capturing the second zone, and the Eastern half of Germany.
The ideal position of Russia created an existential threat to the rest of Europe. But the Europeans and Americans had two advantages.
First: they kept Russia in a ring and could close her access to the sea, when you wish. Second, and more important: they created a sea trade bloc that has brought tremendous revenues compared to the Soviet Alliance (less than effective because of the lack of Russian access to the sea). In the end the arms race, not requiring much effort attapadi, Russia cost is expensive.
When in 1980-e years was the fall in oil prices, Russians are unable to stay afloat due to falling incomes. The Soviet Union was irreparable blow.
5. Now Russia has nothing to lose
The retreat of Russian forces back to the line that separates the country from the European Peninsula, has been unprecedented (see first map). The first belt of the Peninsula was under the control of Russia from the XVIII century. After 1991, it lost power over both zones. Long border with Russia are not located so close to Moscow, as now.
Russian forced to assume that the Euro-American interest in establishing a Pro-Western regime is not restricted to one Ukraine. From the Russian point of view, has been lost not just a critical buffer zone, but to the borders of the country came close hostile to Russia the Ukrainian armed forces.
The fact that under this scenario Russia would be in a very difficult position, means that the Russian will hardly stop in the Ukrainian question there. Russia will never believe that the interest of the West to the region feeds off good intentions.
Russia, even though it is on the periphery, characteristic of unity rather than separation, and its power draws from the forces she gained in the struggle with difficulties. The country is in a geographically vulnerable position; her-in fact, has no outlet to the sea.
Country United not the prosperity, and the total idealized notion of loyalty to mother Russia. And in this sense there is a deep chasm between Europe soedinennye States (which use prosperity as a justification for devotion) and Russia (for which fidelity is derived from the power of the state and consistent definition of what it means to be Russian).
All this gives the Russians a chance. As bad as their economy at the moment, the plainness of their geographical location in all respects and provides them with opportunities that are able to surprise their opponents and might even make the Russians more dangerous.
____________________
Unfortunately, Ukraine, which many of us rightly perceive as a part of Russia, was a foreign government, a part of the buffer zone that separates us from the West. This means that in the war, if it ever does happen, it will spare no one — neither we nor our enemies. Waiting for the fate of Poland the middle of last century, which trampled alternating German, Russian boots.
The opinion of the residents of buffer zones separating geopolitical opponents, nobody cares. They always cheat the warring parties in pursuit of their goals. Today, the West to placate the Ukraine, taking aim at Russia. And we are protected from the West.
Ukraine flourished only in those years when Russia considered its territory, and therefore invested in the development. Neither the European Union nor the United States will never consider Ukraine or any other country “Russophobic belt” their, and investing in them will not. It’s just unreasonable. Support them afloat just in case of another war with Russia.
Today Ukraine behaves about the same as Poland acted in the 1930-ies, when he decided that she gladly accepted in the United family of European Nations and is ready to share with her on equal terms. Even territories — colonies and pieces of Czechoslovakia.
Until the end of August 1939 in Warsaw did not believe that she just used. The Epiphany was terrible and, unfortunately, too late.
Ukraine has yet to choose to live with the West on the rights of the foster child, which only promise to adopt, but will never do it, or to return to the family. Maybe not rich, but its. While the insight did not come — the Ukrainians still believe that the good uncle and aunt of the rich quarter, I want to let them in your luxurious home.
Well, that kind of naivete?
