11 septembre aaron klein abbas abdallah abdallah II abdelkader merah accords d'oslo adam zertal adenauer affaires Ă©trangĂ¨res afghanistan africom afrique afrique du sud ahmadinejad aipac AKP al qaeda al qaida al-arabiya al-fayed al-qaida algĂ©rie algeria aliyah allemagne amĂ©rique america anavad ANC angela merkel ankara ansar dine antisĂ©mitisme antisemitism antizionism apartheid aqmi arabes arabes israĂ©liens arabie saoudite arabs arafat armĂ©e armĂ©niens army ashkenazy assad assemblĂ©e gĂ©nĂ©rale assyriens atatĂĽrk auschwitz autoritĂ© palestinienne ayrault azawad Ă©conomie Ă©glise Ă©gypte Ă©lections Ă©tat Ă©tats-unis Ă©vangĂ©liques bachman baker balkans balladur bangladesh bankruptcy banlieues barack obama barak barbares bat yeor bayrou begin beheading beilin belgique belgium benoĂ®t xvi berbĂ¨res bernheim bible biden bill clinton blancs blood libel BNVCA bourgine brĂ©sil brexit britain brzezinski burke bush byzantins cahuzac cameron canada carter Castro cfr chaos charlie hebdo Chavez cheney chiisme chiites china chine chirac chosroes ii chrĂ©tiens christianisme christianity christians church chypre circumcision cisjordanie citizenship claude guĂ©ant clĂ©menceau clermont-tonnerre clinton cnn CNRS colin powell cologne columbia commentary communautĂ© communism communisme confrĂ©ries congrĂ¨s conseil de sĂ©curitĂ© conservatism conservative conservatives consistoire constantinople constitution contestation coptes coran corĂ©e du nord corsica crif crime crise crise sociale cuba cuisine cukierman culture daesh daniel johnson daniel pearl david pryce-jones dĂ©mocrates dĂ©mocratie dĂ©mographie de gasperi de gaulle democrats demographics demography desportes dhimmis dhimmitude dieudonnĂ© dinard dollar dreyfus droit international droite droits de l'homme druzes egypte eilat mazar eisenhower election elections emanuel emigration empire ottoman ena enderlin enfants erbakan erdogan espagne etat etats-unis ethnic ethnie EU eurabia eurasia euro europe european parliament european union exode expulsion expulsions fabius far left far right fatah fayĂ§al ferdinand ferhat fethullah gĂĽlen fifth republic fillon finkielkraut flandre flotille fmi FN fondapol food foreign affairs foreign policy france franco frĂ¨res musulmans french french muslims front national frontiĂ¨re internationale fusion antisemitism gates gauche gaza gĂ©nĂ©tique gĂ©nocide gĂ©opolitique general assembly genocide geopolitics george soros george w. bush george washington germany ghozlan gingrich giscard d'estaing giuliani globalization golden age goldnadel goldstone grande-bretagne grĂ¨ce greece greens grippe espagnole guĂ©ant guĂ©rilla guerre guerre civile guerre de sĂ©cession gurfinkiel hallal halutz hamas hamon haredim harkabi hĂ©breux hekla herzl herzog hezbollah hillary clinton hillel halkin histoire history hitler hollande holocaust holocauste hungary huntsman hurvah hypercasher ibn saoud icm research idĂ©ologie identitĂ© nationale ifop iforas iiie rĂ©publique ilan halimi immigrants immigration implantations inĂ¶nĂĽ inde ined internet interview irak iran irgoun isabelle ISIS islam islamic state islamism islamisme islamistes islamists israĂ©lites israĂ«l israel israel beiteinu italie ivan de bloch j call j street jabotinsky jĂ©rusalem jĂĽnger jean paul II jean-marie le pen jerusalem jewish revival jews jihad jihadism jihadisme jihadistes jihadists john mccain johnson jordanie jour de colĂ¨re judaĂŻsme judĂ©o-christianisme juifs juifs amĂ©ricains juppĂ© kabylie kadhafi kadima kadimah kassam kemal kennedy kerry kgb khamenei khomeini kippour kissinger knesset kohl korsia kosher kosher supermarket kosovo kotel kouchner l'express l'obs la paix maintenant laĂŻcitĂ© lapid ldj le drian le monde le nouvel observateur le pen le point lebanon left leftwing Levant liban libĂ©raux liberation libertariens libertĂ© libye liebermann ligne verte likoud livni livres london louis xvi LR lyons maccain macron magoudi mahmoud abbas mai 1968 mali mandat mandela mao marcion marcionisme marine le pen marines marion marĂ©chal-le pen maroc marseilles massacres massortis mavi marmara mayflower mayotte mĂ©dias mĂ©lanchon mccain media medias mein kampf merah meretz mergui merkel mexique michel gurfinkiel middle east migrants migration missiles mitterrand mnla mohamed merah monarchie monarchy monde arabe monde islamique monod mont du temple montauban montebourg montesquieu morocco morsi mosaic moscovici moubarak moyen-orient munich murder muslims musulmans napolĂ©on napoleon naqba nasser natalitĂ© national assembly national front nations unies nato nazis neo-french netanyahu nethanyahu new emerging powers new york new york review of books new york times nicolas sarkozy nixon noĂ«l nobel noirs north america norvĂ¨ge nouvel observateur november 13 NPA nuclĂ©aire obama occident occupation oliganthropie olmert olp onfray onu opinion orban orient orthodoxes oslo otan ottomans pacifisme pahlavi paix pakistan palestine palestinians palestiniens palin pape paradigme paris paritĂ© parlement europĂ©en partition pĂ©tain pĂ©trole pence peres peripheral france perses peste antonine peste de justinien petraeus peuple juif pew pipes PLO pogrom pogroms poland police politique poll pologne pompidou populism poutine prĂ©sidentielle prĂ©sidentielles premier tour presidential election primaires primaries printemps arabe processus de paix proche-orient prophĂ¨te protestantisme PS pundak putin qaradawi quai d'orsay quartiers quenelle qumran rabbis rabin racism rahm emanuel raid rajoy rasmussen rĂ©formĂ©s rĂ©formes rĂ©fugiĂ©s rĂ©publicains rĂ©volution reagan refugees regional elections religieux religion rempart republican pacts republicans restaurants revolution right riots riyad rogers romains romney ron paul roosevelt roquette rosenfeld rouhani royal royaume-uni russia russie rwanda sadate sahara salafistes salem al-fayed sanctuaire du rocher sandler santorum sarah halimi sarkozy saudi arabia savir sĂ©golĂ¨ne royal sĂ©nat sĂ©pharades scandale SCO SDN security council selden senate shafik shalit shalom akhshav shamir sharon shas shoah sionisme sionistes socialist socialists sociĂ©tĂ© society sondages soral soviet union spcj ss staline state nobility state of emergency statism stratĂ©gie strauss-kahn strikes subworlds succession sunnites sweden sykes-picot synagogue syria syrie tahrir tardieu tariq ramadan taubira tel-aviv terre d'israĂ«l terror terrorism terrorisme thatcher the west time tocqueville torah totalitarisme toulouse tourisme travaillistes trevidic tribus trilatĂ©rale truman trump tsahal tunisie turkey turquie tv ue uk ukraine UMP un unesco union europĂ©enne union pour la mĂ©diterranĂ©e united nations united states unrwa URSS US usa valeurs actuelles valeurs judĂ©o-chrĂ©tiennes valls vatican vĂ©drine ve rĂ©publique versailles veto vichy vietnam violence walter laqueur war washington washington post wastelands west women wright yemen zacharie zapatero
Dimanche 15 avril 2018
The Strategic Goals of a Restored Russia
The Soviet « Deep State » survived the desintegration of the Soviet Union. It is back with a vengeance.
The Soviet Union was not vanquished by the West in the Cold War. It simply desintegrated in the late 1980’s, out of cumulative failures. A military defeat or a popular insurrection might have resulted in the elimination of its « deep State » : its seven decades old totalitarian infrastructures and superstructures. A mere collapse, however, had completely different consequences.
Beyond the abandonment of the Eastern European glacis and the formal independence of the fifteen Soviet Republic, the ruling Soviet elite stayed largely in place. This was especially true in the very heart of the Empire, the former Federative Socialist Soviet Republic of Russia, rebranded as the Rusian Federation. The army and the secret police were intact, the planned economy was turned to a State-controlled oligarchy, nationalism was substituted to communism. And Russia soon engaged into a systematic rebuilding and reconquest.
This process started under Boris Yeltsin, the allegedly « liberal » First President of post-Soviet Russia. Just a few weeks after the USSR’s dismantlment, Yeltsin’s army seized Transnistria as a Russian outpost between the now formally independent former Soviet Republics of Ukraine and Moldavia. It was the Yelstin bureaucracy in the early 1990’s that issued 1) the « Near Abroad » doctrine, according to which Russia retained « vital interests » in the neighboring post-Soviet countries, and 2) the parallel doctrine of « the Russian World », that envisioned the « reunification » of all Russian-speaking communities into a single nation-State.
Putin, screened as secret police chief in 1998, as prime minister in 1999, and finally as Yetssin’s successor in 2000, just managed the process with more alacrity and tenacity and with more results.
The primary strategic goal of a restored Russia is to bring together all the Russian-speaking people into a single nation-State. In 2014, after the forced incorporation into Russia of Crimea, a province of Ukraine under international law, Putin elaborated that, after the dissolution of the USSR, « millions of people went to bed in one country and awoke in different ones, overnight becoming ethnic minorities in former Union republics, while the Russian nation became one of the biggest, if not the biggest ethnic group in the world to be divided by borders ». What is at stake is not just Transnistria, or Crimea, or the Eastern Ukraine, but also the Russian-speaking communities in the Baltic States or in Central Asia. This contention resembles that of Adolf Hitler from 1933 to 1939, when he carved an ethnically defined Greater Germany in the heart of Europe.
A second goal is to reestablish the former Soviet Union as a single geopolitical unit if not as a single State : an « Eurasian community » with « Russia as the primus inter pares ». It has been largely met. Most post-Soviet countries, with the glaring exception of the Baltic States, who joined both Nato and the EU, and of the Ukraine, who strives to do the same, have reverted into a Russian sphere of influence. The only countervailing power so far has been China, at least in Central Asia.
A third Russian goal is to weaken or eliminate any rival power in Europe : be it the United States and Nato, its military arm, or the European Union, at least as long as it entertains close ties with the United States. A fourth to resume a world power role, by reactivating support for former Soviet client regimes, like Baathist Syria or Cuba, or striking new strategic alliances with emerging powers like Iran.
Sadly, most Western countries either failed to understand what was going on, or decided to ignore it, even in spite of hard evidence. In his recently published book, The End of Europe, James Kirchick writes : « As early as 1987 », when the Soviet Union still existed, « Mikhaïl Gorbatchev advocated Soviet entry into what he called ‘the common European home’ ». Ten years later, after the demise of the Soviet Union, « Boris Yelstin hoped that Russia would one day join ‘greater Europe’ ». In both cases, Western politicians and strategists responded rather enthusiastically : many of them insisted that « a whole raft of institutions, strategic theorems and intellectual currents born out the struggle against Soviet communism » were now passé, and that « it was time to supplant the bipolar order with more inclusive and ‘equitable’ arrangements ».
Eight more years later, in 2005, a gaullist president of France, Jacques Chirac, and a social-democratic Chancellor of Germany, Gerhard Schröder, still acquiesced plans for « a European Security and Defense Union », a « triangular » military alliance with Russia « that would exclude Washington, to parallel and perhaps one day replace Nato ». It did not occur to them, for instance, that « as the West slashed defense budgets and relocated resources to Asia and the Middle East », Russia was undergoing « a massive conventional arms buildup to the point there exists now a perilous imbalance on Nato’s Eastern flank ».
Even more intriguing has been the Barack Obama administration’s attitude from 2009 to 2017. It did not do much to deter the Russian inroads into the Caucasus and Ukraine, and opted from 2015 on for a complete passivity in the Middle East or even active cooperation with Iran, the new Russian protégé.
Much was achieved, in this respect, by soft power. The old Soviet Union created or cultivated all kinds of networks in order to spy on foreign countries, or to influence them : from the communist parties to front communist organizations, from fellow-travelers to peace activists, and from businessmen or companies interested into East-West trade to illiberal rightwingers. Indeed, these networks accounted for perhaps one half of the Soviet global power : as Cold Warriors used then to say, in a somehow exaggerated but more graphic way, « East minus West equals zero ». Putin’s Russia is resorting to the same means, with equal or perhaps greater success.
© Michel Gurfinkiel and the Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies, 2018
Michel Gurfinkiel, a French public intellectual and the editor at large of Valeurs Actuelles, is the Founder and President of the Jean-Jacques Rousseau Institute and a Shillman/Ginsburg Fellow at Middle East Forum.
Afficher les commentaires en (Vue non groupĂ©e | Vue groupĂ©e)
Pas de commentaires
Pas de rĂ©troliens