Tweet
NEW ALLIANCE'S STRENGTH
Pyotr Inozemtsev
WPS Agency
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
February 9, 2009 Monday
Russia
STRATEGIC RESPONSE COLLECTIVE FORCES MAY EVOLVE INTO A MIGHTY
MILITARY-POLITICAL ALLIANCE; Countries represented in the Strategic
Response Collective Forces constitute a nucleus of the erstwhile
Soviet Union.
New structure known as the Strategic Response Collective Forces may
become a powerful military-political alliance. Its members (Russia,
Kazakhstan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Armenia, and Uzbekistan)
are essentially a nucleus of the erstwhile Soviet Union. Without
Ukraine, unfortunately, but its chronic problems and permanent
political and economic crises probably make this absence an asset
rather than liability.
Russia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Belarus are the largest countries
of the new alliance in terms of population (respectively 141, 27, 15,
and 10 million). Do they have anything else in common? They do. First
and foremost, all these countries enjoy strong regimes and political
stability. Russia and Kazakhstan stand on firm economic positions,
owing it to their power resources. Even at $40 per barrel, oil remains
the so called black gold. And gas is gas, always a strategic commodity.
Economic potentials of Russia and Kazakhstan make them locomotive
forces of the new alliance. In other words, they are strong enough
to assist allies and bring them closer to their own level of economic
development. Allies in their turn may and should contribute in other
matters.
Armenia with its population standing at 3 million appears to be a
weak link in the chain. It lacks borders with allies. It is separated
from Russia by Georgia which is definitely unfriendly. It does not
really matter. What matters is that Armenia is a strategic bulwark of
the Strategic Response Collective forces in the southern part of the
Caucasus. Also importantly, Armenian diasporas in the United States,
France, and other countries of the West wield a lot of clout.
One might consider Kyrgyzstan (5 million) and Tajikistan (7 million)
the worst problematic countries of the Central Asian region. Their
GDP per capita is nothing to write home about. Their armies are weak,
societies split.
All the same, the period of revolutions and civil wars is
over. Self-preservation instinct calls for consolidation.
The United States and NATO remain interested in Kyrgyzstan and
Tajikistan only as long as their so called counter-terrorism
operation in Afghanistan continues. They will pull out sooner or
later and promptly forget all about Bishkek and Dushanbe as distant
and unimportant provinces.
Moscow and Almaty will never develop this view of Kyrgyzstan and
Tajikistan, so that the new military-political alliance really stands
a chance to become a force to be reckoned with.
Pyotr Inozemtsev
WPS Agency
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
February 9, 2009 Monday
Russia
STRATEGIC RESPONSE COLLECTIVE FORCES MAY EVOLVE INTO A MIGHTY
MILITARY-POLITICAL ALLIANCE; Countries represented in the Strategic
Response Collective Forces constitute a nucleus of the erstwhile
Soviet Union.
New structure known as the Strategic Response Collective Forces may
become a powerful military-political alliance. Its members (Russia,
Kazakhstan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Armenia, and Uzbekistan)
are essentially a nucleus of the erstwhile Soviet Union. Without
Ukraine, unfortunately, but its chronic problems and permanent
political and economic crises probably make this absence an asset
rather than liability.
Russia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Belarus are the largest countries
of the new alliance in terms of population (respectively 141, 27, 15,
and 10 million). Do they have anything else in common? They do. First
and foremost, all these countries enjoy strong regimes and political
stability. Russia and Kazakhstan stand on firm economic positions,
owing it to their power resources. Even at $40 per barrel, oil remains
the so called black gold. And gas is gas, always a strategic commodity.
Economic potentials of Russia and Kazakhstan make them locomotive
forces of the new alliance. In other words, they are strong enough
to assist allies and bring them closer to their own level of economic
development. Allies in their turn may and should contribute in other
matters.
Armenia with its population standing at 3 million appears to be a
weak link in the chain. It lacks borders with allies. It is separated
from Russia by Georgia which is definitely unfriendly. It does not
really matter. What matters is that Armenia is a strategic bulwark of
the Strategic Response Collective forces in the southern part of the
Caucasus. Also importantly, Armenian diasporas in the United States,
France, and other countries of the West wield a lot of clout.
One might consider Kyrgyzstan (5 million) and Tajikistan (7 million)
the worst problematic countries of the Central Asian region. Their
GDP per capita is nothing to write home about. Their armies are weak,
societies split.
All the same, the period of revolutions and civil wars is
over. Self-preservation instinct calls for consolidation.
The United States and NATO remain interested in Kyrgyzstan and
Tajikistan only as long as their so called counter-terrorism
operation in Afghanistan continues. They will pull out sooner or
later and promptly forget all about Bishkek and Dushanbe as distant
and unimportant provinces.
Moscow and Almaty will never develop this view of Kyrgyzstan and
Tajikistan, so that the new military-political alliance really stands
a chance to become a force to be reckoned with.