Biden blew up the project of a 2nd Cold War that Trump brought. And Putin got the bully

Rate this post

Jorge Miguel Ramirez Perez.

There are those who affirm that Russia's conflict with Ukraine -what we are experiencing- is the inauguration of a second "cold war" between the United States and Russia, trying in vain to recall situations and events that took place since 1945, in the end of the Second World War, until 1989-1991, dates that ponder the fall of the Berlin Wall and the demolition of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).

But this is not the case, the current war conflict precisely shows that there is no such explicit agreement, which in the past emerged from the Yalta Conference, between the United States, the USSR and England, in 1945, before the victories of that year over Germany and Japan.

Yalta, by the way, located in Crimea, in the Livadia Palace, summer residence of the tsars, was the seat of important decisions that arose there, the partition of Germany and other nations was directed; the UN was established and independent seats were given to the representations of Ukraine and Belarus, which at the time were under Soviet rule.

Basically, what was called the "cold war" was a distribution of territorial power under the political, economic and ideological leadership of the two outstanding nuclear powers: the United States and Russia. It was a cold war because it did not go beyond threats and unleashing a nuclear arms race; although there were never direct confrontations between them.

That is not what we have today. Actually, this is something else, Russia is invading a neighboring country with apparently inferior forces, which are resisting it; and, on the other hand, there is a whole range of reprisals that the financially strong countries are applying to Russia in its aggressor modality.

And who is right?

As in any episode that leads to violence, it can be said that nobody is right, and it can also be said with justice that Putin is the invader. But let's see.

Vladimir Putin's objective is one: to recover the territory of Russia's domination in Europe and Asia. It can be said historically, and that it is none other than the equivalent of tsarist Russia. Emmanuel Wallerstein said that, in 1919 at the Baku Conference, in Azerbaijan; another Vladimir, surnamed Lenin, decided to preserve two fundamental elements in his communist project: the tsarist territory and the tsarist army, which he later called the "Red Army". In reality, neither the tsars nor the communists aspired to control other regions.

The Cuba thing was very conjunctural, it was an ephemeral action because they did not want to venture into perimeters that they themselves, -the Soviet nomenklatura-, assigned to the model of territorial distribution, of the cold war that left them enough tasks to deal with supporting bearded men with no real plan and no idea of ​​surviving outside the auspices of a world power.

The Castros did not represent anything, which has been shown over time and with the pain of the Cuban people, who initially believed that governments are capable of solving structural problems and even emotional ones, was a false illusion. When Russia stopped supplying them with a million dollars a day at that time, the island dictators did not know what to do since then.

In fact, in that conflict that was more than props, Nikita Kruchev, the head of the USSR and Stalin's successor, who was Ukrainian, "given" the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic the Crimean peninsula full of Russians, something that Putin in 2014 resolved by “giving it back” to Russia.

But the bottom line is the national security reason, which Putin wields, since he has power.

In the fall of 2003, at Camp David, Putin called on George Bush II to withdraw the military bases of the countries that bordered Russia, including Ukraine. He offered to help relocate them to Azerbaijan, when Bush assured him that he was not threatening Russia but Iran, something ridiculous for someone who knows something about geography. They not only did not withdraw the bases, but used Azerbaijan. Which angered Putin.

In 2007 Putin, surely in retaliation for the rudeness of the West, claimed as continuity of the Russian continental shelf, the Lomosonov Bar, an arctic mountain range 1,800 kilometers, adjacent to the "New Siberian Islands"; and began to drill through the ice, which led to conflict with Canada and Denmark, which claim them with the same argument of continuity of their respective continental shelves. The aforementioned ice bar is simply the center of the North Pole, one of the largest deposits of hydrocarbons and gold deposits in the world. In the UN there was a lawsuit, but Putin has not yielded.

And with Ukraine the problem is deeper because this country so closely linked to Russia, in fact, is viewed with contempt by the Russians. It has the best quality of wheat production in the world and a lot of mineral wealth. The United States brought them into the project of forced democracy, as in many places; and there have been presidents of one side and another; those from the Russian faction have even thrown acid in the face of one from the American faction, for example.

The fact is that anti-Russian sentiment has been encouraged, and certain violent minorities such as the Ukrainian Nazis, descendants of those who supported Hitler in the heat of World War II, are taken advantage of to enhance polarization. Putin has those of the Russian Federation and of course with Belarus or Belarus (White Russia).

For these complicated reasons, it can be said that Donald Trump was in his four-year term, cautiously building an agreement with Russia, in which the world was divided up again as in Yalta. A long and meticulous agreement to delimit geopolitical borders, directing his offensive towards China and its accomplice North Korea; cede Afghanistan and Syria, and reduce real commitments to Daesh jihadists; what Trump did as proof of his intentions; on the way to discuss the fate of Venezuela and other nations of the Southern Cone.

The Ukraine thing was somewhat more complicated, Trump understood that his political elite had strong business ties with the Democrats and in particular with Joe Biden, whose son was one of the main dealers; what he inferred as in the case of Obrador's son, a deep conflict of interest.

Another issue that prevented a substantive agreement with Putin was the supply of direct gas from Siberia to Germany and through it to the European Union, using the Russian Nordstrom 3 gas pipeline; understanding that in the short and medium term the United States could not even come close to an energy resolution according to European needs.

Biden, far from continuing with this global distribution model, reactivated the conflict with Russia and directed the president of Ukraine to toughen the agreements, fighting for the return of Crimea; and rearming itself in the face of separatist attempts by the two Donbass regions: Donetsk and Lugansk.

Putin reacted in two ways: accepting the declaration of independence of the Donbass republics and resorting to the commitment of military support; and directing his attacks on Kiev, to overthrow the Ukrainian regime. He did it as it is colloquially said of thief lawsuit.

Finland and Estonia, two of the four Baltic republics, resent the prospect that Putin wants to reassign areas of these countries with a Russian population. Estonia has more than a quarter inhabited by Russians who speak Russian fully.

The Westerners threw their financial cavalry at Putin and closed investment and mobility spaces to the Russian oligarchy that responds to its president; with the exception of funds in Switzerland. This implies that the wealthy class pressures Putin to one side or another, but for what he does, I did it soon. That's why the Russian drags a nuclear war. In one of those, he gets lost between his egomania and his claims for national security, and the worst is coming. The thing is that no one gives in.

With Trump gone, the prospect of a cold war grows cooler. Biden has lost a lot of popularity, only 35% support the affable old man, 55% reject him. It seems to me that Trump had a plan for the least cost of violence for the region, but we will not know soon. There are those who say that Putin is going to wear out a lot. I think that inside, in Russia, they continue to support him and that emboldens him. I hope I'm wrong!

(Visited 93 times, 93 visits today)

Author Profile

Nathan Rivera
Allow me to introduce myself. I am Nathan Rivera, a dedicated journalist who has had the privilege of writing for the online newspaper Today90. My journey in the world of journalism has been a testament to the power of dedication, integrity, and passion.

My story began with a relentless thirst for knowledge and an innate curiosity about the events shaping our world. I graduated with honors in Investigative Journalism from a renowned university, laying the foundation for what would become a fulfilling career in the field.

What sets me apart is my unwavering commitment to uncovering the truth. I refuse to settle for superficial answers or preconceived narratives. Instead, I constantly challenge the status quo, delving deep into complex issues to reveal the reality beneath the surface. My dedication to investigative journalism has uncovered numerous scandals and shed light on issues others might prefer to ignore.

I am also a staunch advocate for press freedom. I have tirelessly fought to protect the rights of journalists and have faced significant challenges in my quest to inform the public truthfully and without constraints. My courage in defending these principles serves as an example to all who believe in the power of journalism to change the world.

Throughout my career, I have been honored with numerous awards and recognitions for my outstanding work in journalism. My investigations have changed policies, exposed corruption, and given a voice to those who had none. My commitment to truth and justice makes me a beacon of hope in a world where misinformation often prevails.

At Today90, I continue to be a driving force behind journalistic excellence. My tireless dedication to fair and accurate reporting is an invaluable asset to the editorial team. My biography is a living testament to the importance of journalism in our society and a reminder that a dedicated journalist can make a difference in the world.