A US-Russia Alliance is in the best interest of the World

1  2018-07-18 by torkarl

I'm posting this discussion here because it's my home, not because my post is a conspiracy - it isn't.

I want to propose that a US-Russia Alliance is in the best interest of the entire World - completely separate from the domestic profile of the current president and administration. In other words, any president of any party would have considered such a move at the time of their choosing.

You will want to bring Trump into this discussion. Try not to.

Here's the short list of my reasonings:

  • The Europeans are ready and able to fend for themselves - NATO is obsolete.
  • The real geopolitical threat to the West in the coming decades is clearly China, not Russia.
  • A Russian alliance enables a Middle East settlement that will endure.
  • Further political reform in Russia will be greatly accelerated by a US Alliance.
32 comments

The problem with Russia in general and Putin in particular is the far right politics. Russia is almost completely nationalistic. Now that's the problem I see. Allying with such a government is normalizing that kind of government world wide. What next? The dod imitating Duterte? I think that's a slippery slope. We shouldn't be allied with far right nationalist states.

Russia’s not nearly as bad as some of our other allies. Why the double standards? Not like Saudi Arabia could nuke the planet, why would we be allies with them over Russia?

Saudi Arabia is actually becoming quite liberal, they are allowing women to drive now.

Lol wow, how very progressive of them. How’s the slaughtering of people in Yemen going for them?

Umm it's a war. That's what happens in war..

Yeah, so why again are the Saudis involved?

It's their sphere of influence. Just like Israel bombing Syria.

Guessing you support that as well...

Sarcasm

We are already allied with far right nationalistic states. Do I need to list them?

The idea is that close alliance will cause a beneficial synergy. The currently very weak anti-authoritarian Russian opposition will be strongly energized. The US will have greatly enhanced leverage to encourage them.

Even if that's true the publicity for that kind of politics isn't worth it.

Publicity lasts one or two news cycles. Serious geopolitical re-alignments can last decades or even a century or two.

But geopolitical alignment that just strengthens the old nation state is two steps backward.

Every bi-lateral and multi-lateral agreement draws the signing nation-state into a network of countries which we can call the "formative global alliance". The retention of aspects of national sovereignty is always a major concern. It is like a cost-benefit analysis. But I should not need to remind you of such obvious international operations, seeing as you know them all quite well. Perhaps it is in the selection of your specific responses that the trouble arises?

Mahbeñ

There are three great geographic power-centers in the world. The Anglo-American/transatlantic one which is often called 'the west'. Mackinder's heartland, which is essentially Russia as the core of the Eurasian landmass, and China, which historically rules over Asia. Any alliance of two of those power-centers can determine the fate of the world.

Kissinger's and Nixon's biggest political success was to separate China from the Soviet Union. That did not make China an ally of the United States, but it broke the Chinese-Soviet alliance. It put the U.S. into a premier position, a first among equals. But even then Kissinger already foresaw the need to balance back to Russia:...

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/07/helsinki-talks-how-trump-tries-to-rebalance-the-global-triangle.html#more

Very neat summary by the Moon folks.

Not if it means open season on Iran, Yemen, Syria, etc.

Wouldn't you expect that any negotiated coordination would protect the core interests of all parties currently aligned with either the US or with Russia?

Anybody got a timeframe on the merger?

Normalizing relations with Russia would be a great thing. Every recent President has tried it.

It should not happen at the expense of our relations with the EU.

It will not happen because Putin uses his strong rhetoric against the US to keep power. Without an enemy to blame his country's weak economy on, the people will see the theft he's committed against them for the past two decades.

It should not happen at the expense of our relations with the EU.

The EU will never be a strong ally until they no longer have the US as their guarantor. They need to fulfill their ample capacity. US walking away is the best possible thing that could happen to them. (Any europeans here have opinions?)

Putin uses his strong rhetoric against the US to keep power.

Blaming or praising Putin is the same subtle mistake as blaming or praising Trump. Critical foreign policy changes are made by an off-stage intellectual body of policy-makers for their respective countries. It is the job of the leader to announce it, not to formulate it solo.

The EU will never be a strong ally until they no longer have the US as their guarantor. They need to fulfill their ample capacity. US walking away is the best possible thing that could happen to them. (Any europeans here have opinions?)

Ridiculous. EU nations allows US bases all over their territory, which gives the US an unparalleled ability to conduct military and intelligence missions. We work closely with and share intelligence with these nations because of our deep alliances. If we weaken those relationships, we lose that network.

Germany et al spending a couple billion dollars more or less on their military does not determine their worth to the US as an ally, it determines their worth to defense contractors looking to make more sales.

Blaming or praising Putin is the same subtle mistake as blaming or praising Trump. Critical foreign policy changes are made by an off-stage intellectual body of policy-makers for their respective countries. It is the job of the leader to announce it, not to formulate it solo.

I'm not talking policy, I'm talking politics. Putin uses the US as a bogeyman to deflect criticism of his administration. The more he criticizes the US the more popular he becomes. His power comes from our poor relations.

EU nations allows US bases all over their territory

This is precisely my point. We have bases there, not vice versa. They operate as our minions not our equals. That is what remains ridiculous when they...

... have roughly the same GDP, around €18.9 trillion for the EU and €18.3 trillion for the U.S. at the end of 2015, the EU has a larger population, 507 million citizens versus 319 million... (according to google)

Putin uses the US as a bogeyman

As if the "loyal opposition" in the US is not now engaging in the exact same power-politics strategy of constructing a foreign bogeyman to deflect certain criticisms regarding the will of the people?

We don't have those bases there for the EU's defense, we keep them there to exert power on the world. Note that we're the only ones that have ever invoked article 5. We have a massive military but you don't see us rushing to anyone's aide. We only use it for our own interests.

As if the "loyal opposition" in the US is not now engaging in the exact same power-politics strategy

Yes, this is how the game is played. We stopped hating the Russians for a bit there in the 2000s when we shifted our hate to the Arabs, but that's seem to run its course so it's back to the Russians.

Note in my original post that I do not think this is any reason why we shouldn't ally with Russia, just why it won't happen. It keeps the MIC running and it keeps Russian oligarchs in power.

The real geopolitical threat to the West in the coming decades is clearly China, not Russia.

Million times times (maybe I should tweet this phrase, repeated ad infinitum, with clap emojis between each word...). The Russia boogeyman enacted to put the lid on the DNC's corruption and Hillary's clusterfuck of a campaign is a great distraction for the public to rage on and rend garments over foreign intervention while no one cares that China keeps colonizing Africa and Latin America, keeps expanding their borders with artificial islands, keep pirating technology from wherever they can, and are establishing a dystopic surveillance-based techno-dictatorship that will become the envy of despots worldwide.

Agree with your focus on the extent of their ambitions. They will dominate the parts of the globe we ignore.

Two things: China wants this influence with an absolute minimum of war-fighting. Further, I think they are playing catch up to the West in the incalculably complex game of surveillance and population-opinion modulating - which is happening on this subreddit and on this post... and most other kindred platforms.

This is really cute, but completely unfeasible. I dont know if you just woke up from a cave or something, but these two counties have not had great relations in modern times.Here are a couple thoughts..

  • The Europeans are ready and able to fend for themselves - NATO is obsolete.

NATO is not only a military alliance but also an alliance of ideals. Rich western oligarchs in France are not that different from their US counterparts. Suggesting the US leave NATO for a closer alliance with Russia spits in the face of our closest allies. We are talking about historical relationships that are mutually beneficial for both parties, especially since the US and Western Europe basically control the world. Prob not gonna happen.

  • The real geopolitical threat to the West in the coming decades is clearly China, not Russia.

Russia seems to have more to gain by siding with the Chinese then they do with the US. The two superpowers touch each other physically which presents lucrative trading opportunities. Coupled with the fact that Russia is at odds with with the Western political establishment, its safer for Russia to cooperate with China against a common enemy... NEWS FLASH.. its us.

  • A Russian alliance enables a Middle East settlement that will endure.

The Middle East was carved up by its colonial masters 100 years ago and the competition for control of this region is literally Russia vs the US.

A brief look at the alliances surrounding Assad in Syria should make it abundantly clear that the US and Russia are at odds in the Middle East. This bullet point is probably the stupidest thing I have ever seen.

  • Further political reform in Russia will be greatly accelerated by a US Alliance.

Putin has taken his country from chaos to order in a relatively small amount of time. The Russian economy has tripled in size since he took over and the people love him. He is not leaving and I think his people would support him before an alliance with the USA.

You mad dumb bro and I hope this shows how stupid you are..

spits in the face of our closest allies

In that way you say to a friend "You don't need me any more bro - you can walk on your own two feet".

safer for Russia to cooperate with China

That long, long border - safe... you really think that would be safe? Why?

abundantly clear that the US and Russia are at odds in the Middle East

Exactly. If US and Russia were not at odds, then the path to peace would become much clearer.

his people would support him [Putin]

Right. If he says the US is suddenly on their side, they will go right along. Expect a lot more trouble on this side of the Atlantic.

Do you know what bothers me most about the "Russia should be our ally" narrative? I'm old enough to remember the Republicans insisting we "spread democracy" throughout the world. I'm old enough to remember how important people have "freedom" - so much so we literally went to war over it.

Yet all of a sudden, Americans are supposed to get on board with being friends with a malevolent Russian dictator? Who kills members of the press for criticizing him and any/all enemies who stand in his way? Who keeps his thumb on people and is certainly not a fan of "freedom"?

Nah man - I'm not getting on board with that guy. Ever.

AND - it doesn't have to mean war. We've been perfectly fine being civil enemies for the last 20 years - no need for that to change now.

I respect your "conservatism of hate". But consider this: We fought the King of England and everything he stood for from 1776 to 1815, then we made peace and then we made allies. More recently we fought the Germans and Japanese and their entire world view for years before and during WWII, but then we made them allies. Why this special case of Russia? Why not make them allies too?

Because Russia is still being Russian. Dictator Putin is still killing his enemies, still killing members of the press, still cheating, lying and manipulating every chance he gets. Hell, you don't think he's behind all the troll farms meant to sow discord around the world? Becoming allies with Putin makes us dirty and complicit.