Russia is considering membership NATO

[Talal]

The strategy document experts close to the Kremlin, urged Russia to join NATO. As stated in an article published on the website weekly Der Spiegel, this "breakthrough appears to have gained the approval of President Medvedev, within the ruling elite is encountering strong resistance."

The newspaper reminds that the question of Russian membership in NATO is not up for the first time, for example, in March this year in an interview with Der Spiegel, former Defense Minister of Germany Volker Rouet insisted on the need to "open the door for Russia to NATO." Then the proposal, writes the author, Benjamin Bidder not found in Russia a great response. For example, Fyodor Lukyanov, a leading foreign policy expert, said he could not imagine how Moscow can obey the alliance, which dominated the United States.

At the same time Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel said: "Before invite Russian, would be nice to find out whether they want to join NATO. But now the Kremlin itself sends signals to the West, saying that Russia is interested in rapprochement and even in the introduction. In his unpublished documents of the Moscow Institute of Contemporary Development (INSOR) offers three possible involvement of Russia in NATO, according to the German edition.

This "institutional organizational integration into the alliance in the form of Russia's membership in NATO, a joint defense alliance between NATO and Russia, which could mark a new pact on security, or the creation of a unified coordination of the NATO Council and Russia."

This paper argues Bidder citing INSOR already on the table from Medvedev. Officially, the initiative could be announced at the end of the week on the world political forum in Yaroslavl, "of course, in the presence of heads of state."

But will the liberal wing of President Medvedev's victory in the dispute over the accession to NATO, is not obvious - the front of the Moscow hard-liners powerful and influential, "wrote Bidder, citing as proof the word well-known journalist and political analyst Maxim Shevchenko:" If Russia becomes part of the West, it disappears as Russia, as a historical subject. " The publication also cites Russia's ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin, who is sure that Russia's accession to NATO in his life did not take place: it would stymie many East European members of NATO.

[Talal]

"if" and that's a big 'if' mind you but if Russia joins NATO it could spell a lot of trouble for Afghanistan especially the fact that their primary incentive to partake in NATO activities in Afghanistan could be gaining control of te northern front and some nice lil rubies

[Admin Khan]

"if" and that's a big 'if' mind you but if Russia joins NATO it could spell a lot of trouble for Afghanistan especially the fact that their primary incentive to partake in NATO activities in Afghanistan could be gaining control of te northern front and some nice lil rubies

I'm not too sure if Washington D.C would be comfortable with Russian presence in Afghanistan.

[Catya Sher]

I fear that any actual lack of comfort would be simply due to base competition between the US and Russia for Afghan minds, hearts, money, gold, resources.

In former days, yes, allowing Russia an overt entree into the war or other involvement, would have caused much opposition from the US govt

But today they are secretly allies in too much. Especially with Medvedev, who is a softie. If Putin returns to office, things could change. But too many deals have been made behind the scenes, I fear, that we in the public never hear about.

Hence I would not be surprised if Russia weren't given a grudging OK to become more closely involved.

How would this benefit the US?
Well anyone observant can see that the European countries -- never happy about participation in the American invasion and occupation -- are probably fed up. They are itching to get out of Afghanistan and get their troops back to safe havens.

Here's where a muscular Russia COULD be welcomed. While the Russian military is in terrible shape compared with how it was before it invaded Afghanistan in the late 1970s, it does still have many more soldiers than most NATO powers.

The excuse on both ends would be that they are helping to destroy or seal off the training camps and routes into Southern Central Asia from whence some militants may go to the Caucasus region to bomb Russian facilities.

I see that as awful. But to both American and Russian general public, it would be more than sufficient to create support for an entry role by Russia in Afghanistan.

Astaghfirallah!

[Catya Sher]

Yes! That has always been my worry, and I would like to know exactly what the agenda is.

If you ever hear the reports by that descendant of Khrushchev, Evgeny, a Colonel if I recall who says he reads Persian poetry in his spare time, he sounds cynical of the American/NATO effort in Afghanistan. I'm speaking of the channel RT, which used to be Russia Today. It had to change its name to get more worldwide support due to the stigma of Isvestia and those state-run media monoliths pushing Communism.

Many Russians, especially younger generation, I am sure don't believe anything America says.
But they are not the ruling class.

So we have to fathom the mentality of the power elite and the bureacracy.

It's not quite clear.
I would like to ferret that out much better. I always keep an ear out.

My instinct, though, is that the Russians are spoiling for some sort of revenge.
[For those who believe in Astrology, the Soviet Union was ruled by Scorpio. In negative manifestations that equals persistence until vengeance for failures is achieved.]

On a little more constructive level, looking from their side, they would like to assuage the blow to their egos they suffered due to worldwide jeers that they could not subdue Afghanistan.

I have a postcard from that era showing a Mujahid looked at a downed Red Air Force fighter. The caption in English and [Pashto? It was sent to me from Peshawar bazaar] says "The wounded pride of a superpower".

So the bitterness which the Russians suffer from that defeat may be lingering.
This is another Russian characteristic: a LONG MEMORY for every bad experience.

They are STILL going and on with public displays over their victory in "the Great Patriotic War" - WWII as if it were yesterday rather than 65 years ago!

I looked at a Ukrainian website where they were discussing the Red Army experience in Afghanistan. It was quite active.

It's actually a positive that they DO go over their past and examine it.

In the US, such a war would be forgotten in the public mind within a year or two!
Too many celebrities to follow the latest antics of, too much trash piled in the mind by reading the "news" here !

My message is: the Russians have NOT forgotten.

What they will do in the future, I am watching myself.

[Catya Sher]

Maybe even WORSE!

Though this time Russian intervention might take on a different guise. More sinister, subtle.
Not the brute military force route this time, as obviously that didn't work.

Maybe some troops, advisers, same old infiltration of Afghan government, military officials, conspiring with Afghans who are disaffected with NATO actions and tactics.

These are some possibilities that crossed my mind.

[If you are a dissatisfied Karzai subordinate reading this: catch on to Moscow's tricks and don't be tempted to work for any Russian front organization. Tell your friends too that it never pays to work for Russians! Always leads to the WORST disaster.

Even their recent spies in New York and the East Coast of the U.S. got caught in a flurry of embarrassment for Moscow a few months ago. (That is, unless there was some secret deal leading to a Russian revelation of the KGB agents at that moment in time, as a few observers cynically asserted.)

[Catya Sher]

Most people have forgotten this. But during the anti-Soviet Jihad, India was still VERY VERY close with the Soviet Union.
After the latter system's partial breakdown in early 90s, India was cast adrift and looked to get away from the shackles of socialist state control. Patterns that came of course from copying the Soviet ways.

So, let's say this. The two already have close ties from earlier decades. Perhaps those would be reactivated and India's humanitarian and other organizations would be the fronts used in some cases by Russia.

Could this already be occurring? Something to wonder about.
I know I bristle at the large Indian presence in Afghanistan in the current era.
Maybe this is one of the reasons why I feel so antagonistic about that.

If it were I, and starting a new govt for Afghans, first thing I would do is cut back those Indian organizations which may be fronts for other countries. Then I would tone down the entire Indian apparatus.
I would politely say thank you for your help --- but we don't need you anymore. Here is the Ariana flight for Delhi....

[Catya Sher]

I never have trusted India for the very reason mentioned above.

Too, they were a huge bureaucracy. So inefficient.

I assume they have greatly improved in many areas, because I try to give the benefit of the doubt.

But I still feel at root that what does a Hindu power have to do with a devoutly Muslim country? There are, of course many short-term benefits to be gained.
But is the Indian spirit attuned with the Afghan one?
I don't believe so. Myself.

So, long-term the partnership doesn't really work because it's spiritually unharmonious.

Russia is the worst on the list as a fiend [did I write that by mistake? I don't think so!] - for a resurgent Afghanistan. I'm employing that word which is always used with regard to Russia in the 2000s.

Nothing that India is providing could not be replicated by a Muslim country which I would feel would have better intentions.
I suspect India's intentions. Or let's say they have a "double programme" going on.

I don't like their having so many consulates, etc. Why, one must ask. How many Indian nationals live in Afghanistan permanently? Not many. A lot may work there.
The whole set up of India causes Red Flags. Perhaps indeed Russia or similar type countries are using Indian projects as covers from which to operate to enlist Afghans as agents or informers OR, more often, agents of influence.

Look, as long as people from other religious backgrounds are being brought in, why not use more neutral countries such as South Korea, which used to be active helping Muslim countries like Iraq in development.

That is not probably needed, as the Muslim world is full of talent. Think of all the educated Egyptians. [Speaking of Isida, the Russian word for Isis from the other thread....!]

The Turks, also Sunnis. They would help. There are so many who could so much better adapt to Afghan ways.
No need for India to stretch a long arm across Pakistan. Surely not entirely an altruistic one.

[afghan]

i dont believe russia will join the NATO, if we talk about the soviets , there is no more soviet union so more soviets. i have listened to the to the interviews of many ex-soviet generals and diplomates, they all admitted that it was huge mistake going into afghanistan. if we believe the cold war is over its not quite right, the american are trying to establish its bases in ex-soviets states. on the other hand russians are closely watching the american failure in afghanistan. they believe the american will have similar fate as the soviets.

[drona]

Most people have forgotten this. But during the anti-Soviet Jihad, India was still VERY VERY close with the Soviet Union.

After her independence India steadfastly pursued the NAM because we were leery of any foreign intervention from super powers. Neither did we want to be a pawn in their rivalry.

India's increasingly friendly relations with USSR during the 70's must be seen in the context of Indo-Pak war of '71. There was a burgeoning refugee crisis from E. Pakistan because of which India had to explore military options vis a vis our dear friendly neighbor. Pakistan was sitting pretty in Uncle Sam's lap and had a growing strategic relationship with China. Against this backdrop it is not surprising that she had to move slightly away from her traditional non aligned stance and seek support from USSR. If not, China and/or US would have invaded India to protect their favorite rentboy Pakistan.

Indeed US did send its Aircraft Carrier Group (USS Enterprise) to Bay of Bengal to pressurize us once the war started. But couldn't do much more, or else the Russians would have intervened.

So, let's say this. The two already have close ties from earlier decades. Perhaps those would be reactivated and India's humanitarian and other organizations would be the fronts used in some cases by Russia.Could this already be occurring? Something to wonder about.

Oh dear ! This looks suspiciously like a conspiracy theory as I see a complete disconnect from facts.

1. A stable, prosperous Afghanistan is in India's interest. Why would India allow other countries to use its organizations in such a manner ? India is not Pakistan. Our military does not sacrifice the national interest because of short-sightedness and to earn some dollars.

2. Can't the same argument be used against the humanitarian organizations from other countries? Should there be no foreign presence of any kind in Afghanistan ? That is a slippery slope...

I know I bristle at the large Indian presence in Afghanistan in the current era.

I am confused . Are you a Pakistani ? If not, then why ?

[drona]

But I still feel at root that what does a Hindu power have to do with a devoutly Muslim country?

Oh .. I get it . Religious bigotry !

I don't like their having so many consulates,

How many ? 4 ? 14 ? 100 ?

why not use more neutral countries such as South Korea

LoL @ the "neutral" country . The very same one which hosts US military bases. Can't they recruit agents for CIA once US leaves? Do you support US occupation ?

The Turks, also Sunnis. They would help.

Yep .As one of the member states of NATO,and sending troops to Afghanistan, they already helping a lot

. Surely not entirely an altruistic one.

Only fools believe that India is in Afghanistan because of altruism. She is there for her own interest. A stable, prosperous Afghanistan is in India's interest. An unstable one, hosting anti-Indian groups is not .

[amna.]

Russia and the USA can't be part of the same organization. They are at odds and have different world intentions.

[Catya Sher]

"drona", you are so hostile sounding and so supercilious that there's no point to reply to you. The Communists on this site are much friendlier and have a sense of humor. You on the other hand, sound as though you are out for the last drop of blood.

[drona]

Catya,
I apologize for my rude tone. I guess I have been interacting with too many Pakistanis who apply asinine logic and attribute some sinister motives to every action of India how ever benign it is.

[Talal]

its not a matter of US feeling OK with letting Russia in, its a matter of Russia willing to get their hands dirty

They have been offered in the past to join NATO operations as well. Russia is severely handicapped in economic terms due to its loner attitude. Expensive arms sales to China and India kept its arms industry and thus to a significant extent its economy afloat so far but as nations become more self reliant in their defense needs and branch out to new vendors ( India's MRCA being the case here, whose likely winner seems to be an aircraft that wont be Russian)..But anyways Russia is getting bottled down and it may decide to venture out, but like i said its unlikely to happen anytime soon and more importantly it wont be a military expedition more like a sneak attack on the deeds to the Afghan mines.

Lets not forget this war isn't about Islam or terrorism, it never was