by Kostas G. Papachristodoulou, Commodore HN (ret.).
Among the issues speculated by international media related to the summit between presidents Trump and Putin in Alaska were the red carpet, the body language and the possible secret protocol. The two Geopolitical approaches under which our world worked during 20th century has been explained in a previous article last month in this international mass media forum The relation between Geo-Policy, Strategy and the Economy – All About Shipping
The pursuance of Heartland power (Russia or USSR in previous years) was to construct and control its “living space” (the areas on its territory either occupied or not which they work as cushions or buffer zones with possible adversaries but dominated in such a manner that there would be as space to provide a “free breath” to its sovereignty), as the sea power pursues to maintain the rimland around the heartland ensuring the non-exit of Naval power of Heartland to “hot seas”. See the article “The Strategy of Battle”… – All About Shipping.
In these terms, Russia in order to threat and limit the projection of sea power on land created gaps in its dominated Rimland zone by creating bases on it such as in Syria, Iran etc., even in remote places such as Cuba, Venezuela and elsewhere, supporting governments supposed to be backed-up or even entire states while the Sea power tried to dissolute the compound of forces composed the Heartland power. Thus, the approach to Geopolitics by the two superpowers was analyzed by two different points of view in order to give an explanation for their actions, but having the same aim, the providing of power to dominate the globe being the benchmark for other forces to pursue interests in their vicinity. The political changes during the dissolution of USSR turned Russia into the retrack of the previous political system, accumulated more strength and balancing to the next century’s high post point rather than to be the end of USSR’s existence. Additionally, the announcement of Ukraine to enter the EU wasn’t the cause for Russia to take action but an early warning as well as the announcement of entering in procedures to be a part of NATO wasn’t the cause but the challenge to take action.
The cause was that Crime(a) had been left in pending issues for where it would be belonged, in the area is harbored the North Fleet of Russia and the population was at the most composed of Russians with the UN resolution for free elections in the area to choose where it would like to be attached having been remained unresolved. Putin has declared that Ukrainians are brothers who took the “wrong way” while several intelligence officials and high members of his government had put pressure on him to react more aggressively. In conclusion, the highest priority of Russia is NATO to stay away from its Naval capabilities in the Black Sea having considered in the resolution of 2012, which capability even if has not ever deployed so far, at the most in the nature of Naval capability projected on land, it maintained the dimension of the capacity to do this in the case it would be needed. In practice Russia has not focused on Naval expenditures but it is vital for it to have the force confronting other Naval Forces in the Sea environment South of its territories in Mediterranean and Middle East. Given the wrong assumption for the Russia political vulnerability in the area, Biden’s administration having foreseen the trend of Germany’s coalition geopolitical interest to expand its “living space” and gain domination on lands providing energy sources over the former USSR states’ lands, exploited this opportunity using NATO and EU as means of achieving a possible positive outcome which would provide its interest that was in practice, the restriction of Heartland’s power naval capacity but not having promised that this approach would be continue to deploy in case of a change in political situation inside US due to elections. It is common sense in high Geopolitical circles that the Democrats have in higher priority in the the former European communists’ countries issues, while the Republicans having priorities out of Europe. That is the real world of political parties in the US having not changed in the last five decades at the least.
As a result, the conflict with Russia, which would be in several other places less vital for Russia but equally interesting, formed in a war between Russia and Ukraine. Leaving aside the conspiracy theories about the detonation of this clash as if having been planned by western countries exploiting Zelenskys’ political figure either they would be real or not, in practice it has been proved that the midsummer night dream of Ukraine would beat Russia was just a deviating dream for the country to change influence zone.
Any peace resolution agreement would not be fruitful for Ukraine after this clash. Russia exploited the opportunity to prove that this war having a high international profile is not possible to be lost by Russia “having had to provide the road” to Russia returning to its position as the one of the two superpowers on the planet. As in democracy they need two political parties for it to work smoothly, the governmental party and the supreme opposition party, it seems that the globe needs two superpowers confronting to work smoothly. The republicans in the US assume that the main adversaries of Russia are the UK on the north seas and France in the Mediterranean trusted them having the first word on Russia confrontation while democrats support the approach of involving in Europe issues more energetically. The UK will not change its policy due to being the main adversary to Russia before the war in Ukraine, during this and will be also after this. France will be a little less aggressive even if we have no to forget the assassinations such as the France national oil service president in Moscow as a result of a supposed airplane accident 15 years ago having gone there for negotiations when Russia was under pressure for oil market deficiencies export involving Total.
As far as it concerns what EU awaited from the summit of Putin-Tramp and all these opened procedures, I assume that they didn’t have any idea and preference of what it is profitable for them, they continue not having and the only thing they pursue is to be in the circle of negotiations, that’s why Tramp called them in Oval Office, this Monday, not to include/insert them in the decision-making process, over possible actions for a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire (a peace agreement is out of the frame, in my opinion), but to give them what they seek, simply to be in the circle.
The international market and transportation will be stabilized on a new point/level, independently of which would be the outcome from all this, as the superpowers’ Geostrategy capacity will not change.
The priority of diplomacy in international relations, which maintained the world working after WWII, has been left aside for more than two decades due to not only being inserted in a world where the weapons addressing the changes, but also due that same was confused by following trends not belonging to its nature.
—
N.B. The Geo-political chart in this article comes from the book “SILENT WARFARE, Third edition, Abram N. Shulsky”, the other two charts by an article of BBC electronic media “In maps: The war-ravaged Ukrainian territories at the heart of the Trump-Putin summit” (Mapping Ukraine’s frontlines and ceasefire scenarios).
