DEBATE

The United States and Russia are not on the verge of a new Cold War

Introduction
As soon as the definition of the Cold War is an intense economic,
political,military, and ideological rivalry between nations, short of military
conflict; sustained hostile political policies and an atmosphere of strain between
opposed countries, it can be argued that there is not Cold War nowadays
because this, in fact, is not a global military and ideological struggle. It is just a
regional dispute.
The nature of today's conflict is different. As Vasily Kashin ( an analyst with the
Moscow-based Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies) said, "it's
more like the conflict between the 19th-century great powers," a time of imperial
struggle over British versus Russian supremacy in Central Asia. "It's more about
the attempts of rising powers like China and Russia to resist the dominant
influence of the United States".

1. At the heart of the Cold War there were fundamental ideological differences.
On the one hand, there was the communist bloc, which stated that capitalism
and the entire West would collapse. On the other hand, there was a response
that communism - a terrible enemy, and that it should collapse. While the
communism was alive, the Americans could not live peacefully.
During the Cold War, there was some confrontation in the ideology of systems.
Now situation is different. In the modern Russian society has the same type, as
any other modern country, except maybe two or three exotic countries like North
Korea or Somalia. All others have the same structure, all have a market
economy, private property, democracy, elections. There is no a fundamental
contradiction.

2. The concept of a "new Cold War" contains the wrong idea about Russia and
the West, especially when it comes to the generation that grew up after the
collapse of the Soviet Union.
There are clear differences between this conflict and the Cold War: there is the
lack of a global ideological measure, the prevalence of tension in the post-Soviet
space, but not in other regions, as well as the growing role of non-Western
countries (China, India, Brazil, etc.), which remain neutral.

3. The world has become a globally open. The current situation is different from
the conflict that occurred in the world during the second half of the XX century,

by a profound difference in the interpersonal relations of citizens of the

conflicting countries.
Despite the talks of a new Iron Curtain, mutual hostility and mistrust, which fell
between the East and the West, Russian and Americans can in most cases travel
to each other, communicate freely with each other and seek common ground on
the most difficult issues through respectful dialogue.
Russian websites: http://actualcomment.ru/kholodnoy-voyny-net-i-nebudet.html
http://m.ria.ru/world/20150323/1054000282.html
4. The Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov Addressing the US has said
that Russia "does not want and will not allow a new Cold War, we
return to constructive cooperation on the basis of respect for
mutual interests."

5. Russia to the United States: "We do not want a new Cold War"
The effect of the sanctions and the collapse in oil prices pushed Moscow to
try to recover, through the diplomatic channel, a dialogue with
Washington, but asked also to America a little more effort in cooperation
and a few steps back in terms of international politics.
Russia will never follow the path of self-isolation" - Despite "feel
several statements of Western partners who need further isolate Russia,
all these efforts will not lead to any result," said Lavrov. "President Obama
has thought possible in his address to the nation on Tuesday about the
same thing," he continued, adding that "Russia will never follow the path
of self-isolation, the search of enemies and suspicion, as he said Putin ".

6. "Resolution Ukrainian is two-way" - To Lavrov "Russia will try to

resolve the conflict Ukrainian preserving the territorial integrity of the
country
7. The impatience of American imperialism - In his address the Foreign
Minister does not hide a certain impatience with the attitude of the
imperialist United States that is based on the conviction that "the number
one, and that everyone else should recognize ". This attitude, according to
Lavrov, produces problems without solving the real international nodes, for
example in terms of security: "Our Western partners have to understand
that security in today's world it is not possible through a unilateral
approach," he explained.
8. Call it an infowar rather than a COLD WAR 2.0

the war of words between the two sides in the fight over control of
Ukraine. It established by now that this is not a "defeat of the West" as the
first report deplored after the annexation of the Crimea, but a political and
diplomatic success of historic (Ukraine leaves the sphere of Russian
influence to get into that EUR-American) it comes time to figure out how
we can proceed from here on out, especially after what happened to the
Air Malaysia MH17, which promises to become the Ustica Eurasia. The
campaign of Russia Today.
Issuer Moscow is playing a infowar preventive aim of demonstrating that
the incident is being used and manipulated to favor of the process of
realignment of Kiev to the western capitals. Pepe Escobar added a new
dimension to this comparison by saying that YouTube, Facebook and
Twitter are the only sources of evidence put forward by the US, which
would attribute to the armed separatists from Moscow responsibility for
the incident. In practice: an offer by Russian pressure groups alarmed
Germans of the affaire NSA-technological and economic interests
determined to break the balance of the Digital US hegemony.

9. Battle of ideas
The same Escobar Asia Times clarified his thinking, drawing international
economist Immanuel Wallerstein, father of economic globalism, according
to which the "central power system", the US, cannot accept the break
multipolar balance to hegemonic their favor. From this point of view it
would be an MH17 desperate set up by Kiev to discredit Moscow finally, to
break the stalemate on the ground and catalyze financial support and
Western Economic. At this extreme view and strongly ideological contrasts
that of Zigbniew Brzezinski, whose globalism is otherwise decidedly
Atlantic and not multipolar, according to which Russia today has shifted
too much toward China. Brzezinski, as well as incorporating Europe,
therefore also caters to the "inner circle" of Putin evoking the fear of
excessive subjection to Beijing in the wake of the energy agreements and
financial (the New Development Bank). Regularity of the infowar therefore,
both Washington and Moscow, are to turn to the ruling classes: the
Germans, the Russian side, in order to emphasize the convenience to not
align to a still smoky Atlanticism energy; groups Russian leaders
themselves, on the American side, to incite to break solidarity with a
leader who would lead them to isolation.

10.The axis-strategic missile

Jim Thomas, vice president of the think tank Center for strategic and
Budgetary Assessment (Csba), in recent testimony before Congress, spoke

of the need for a multilateral approach to the reduction of intermediaterange missiles (Treaty bilateral US-Soviet "INF"), also involving China. It is
"flush out" Beijing from its status as a "free rider" of a process that has so
far involved only Moscow and Washington. China, Iran and North Korea are
clearly identified as the source of the main concerns of the US and allied
missile. And Thomas goes to indicate a direct Russia-US agreement to
reduce the limitations in the use of advanced bases only conventional
missiles with range 500-2000 km, ie such as to prevent deployments
Russians west of the Urals. The stakes are the regional missile shield that
the United States could achieve: the one in the Persian Gulf along with
other monarchies of the Gulf Cooperation Council and that focuses on
South Korea-Japan. Significantly, neither side will damage Russian.

11.The West Pacific Moscow and Washington have interests in common

Even more explicitly, on National Interest, another expert Csba, Evan
Montgomery has proposed a revision of the Treaty Inf to allow the
deployment of advanced missiles in the Asian theater, maintaining the
prohibition on the European market. An explicit offer also in Moscow,
which in the case of a serious geopolitical upheaval as the annexation of
Taiwan to China would be to converge with Washington to defend the
strategic stability of the Western Pacific.

12.And business continues

These days the news of wealthy business that end between the two sides
(Russian and American) Pacific, where for example the giant metallurgical
magnate Alexei Mordashov's Severstal is in talks to surrender to the
Americans and Ak Steel Dynamics Steel two plants in the Midwest , valued
according to the Financial Times which is around $ 2.3 billion. And KBR, the
US engineering group from the galaxy Halliburton, was awarded the
renovation of an important segment of the refinery Gazprom of Omsk in
Western Siberia (Hydrocarbon Engineering). In short, while the Eastern
European elites in Europe (last example, the Lithuanian Artis Pabriks tough
editorial in The New York Times) are riding the wave of anti-Russian, the
reality of the "hard facts", the agreements and strategic interests in the
long run between the two major powers on the horizon Eurasian. They
could cut out the "Baltic Line", for the moment winning the infowar within
Germany and an accomplice absent.

13.It is true that the root of the cold war - understood not as "a segment of
history but [as] a permanent curvature of contemporary geopolitics" - is
the first geopolitical than ideological. As stated in a frank and realistic the
recent publishing of a magazine inspired , "for America is secure against

the emergence of a rival power in Eurasia. It matters little whether

Communist, Buddhist or vegan ".

14.The fact remains that, if Russia has a geopolitical vision, but it does not
have an ideology in opposition to Western. Yet, as Aleksandr Dugin claims,
"Russia, seen as a civilization, cannot, but must have their own values,
different from those of other civilizations."

15.The need to refer to the guiding principles of their civilization is not just
Russia, but all of the areas that comprise the Eurasian continent, and so all
those forces that share a perspective of Eurasia sovereign. Gbor Vona has
clearly expressed this need: "There is enough - says the Hungarian
political - simply an alternative geographical and geopolitical, but we feel
the need for spiritual Eurasianism. If we are not able to secure it, then our
vision is only a different conception of political, economic, military or
administrative, so able to represent a structural diversity, but not a pain in
the qualitative level of the western face of globalization. There will be a
political pole side but not a qualitative superiority. This can create the
basis for a new Cold War or world in which you will face anti-traditional two
forces, as happened in the case of the USSR and the USA, but it certainly
will not counteract the historical process of the spreading of antitraditionalism . For us it would be precisely the essential. From our point of
view, it is inconceivable a clash in which globalization is opposed to
another globalization ".

Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Consequences of the End of the Cold War for
International Security, in The New Dimensions of International Security,
Adelphi Papers, 265, 1991-1992, p. 3.
Costanzo Preve, the fourth world war
Barack Obama, 27 marzo 2014, pp. 20-21.

Vona Gbor, Nhny bevezet gondolat a szellemi eurzsianizmus

megteremtshez, Magyar Hperin, I, 3, nov. 2013 genn. 2014, p.
294.