Here is the news report in part. The whole report is after the jump.
Russian president Vladimir Putin arrived in Beijing on Tuesday. There, Putin, an entourage of foreign diplomats and their Chinese counterparts called for a peaceful resolution to Iran’s nuclear issue through dialogue and negotiations. A joint statement coming out against military action was signed in Beijing by the leaders of both countries.The two countries warned
that if a confrontation occurred the region and the whole international society would suffer since Afghanistan, West Asia and North Africa are all undergoing a turbulent period.According to Forbes,
Given the outcomes in Iraq and Libya, Russia has learned that the fall of old allies inevitably leads to the loss of economic and political influence in those countries. . . . .Forbes, in its analysis, relies on work of Nikolay Kozhanov, a visiting fellow at the Washington Institute, described after the jump. Kozhanov's full report, as well as a brief biography of him, are also after the jump.
Kozhanov does not think Moscow's stance toward Syria or Iran will harden further, and argues that Putin's stance agains military action in Iran is rational:
The reasons why Moscow does not want to fully support the Western coalition against Syria and Iran are also quite practical, and do not depend on the personal preferences of a president. Given the outcomes in Iraq and Libya, Russia has learned that the fall of longtime partners inevitably leads to the loss of economic and political influence in said countries. Whether Russia stays out of the conflict (as in Iraq) or unobtrusively helps to overthrow its old allies (as in Libya, where Moscow was the first government to stop exports of military equipment to Qadhafi), the result is the same: Russia has been compelled to leave countries liberated from dictators.Therefore, without solid guarantees regarding the security of its interests, Russia has been fighting hard for Syria (one of its last stands in the Arab Middle East) while protecting Iran from the prospect of military strikes. Russia also values Tehran's help in promoting peace and stability throughout the Caspian littoral and Central Asia, in trying to limit the presence of third countries in regional affairs, in counteracting human and drug trafficking, and in deterring the spread of internal revolutions.
The implication is that it would be bad policy for all to War with Iran.
The Forbes does not mention China's interest in preventing War with Iran. Uighurs live in China, next to Sunni Afghanistan,a and insist on continuing their Sunni and traditional ways, contrary to the Han Chinese wishes. It may be that China is simply paranoid: it does not want another Sunni country, which Syria would become without Iran's support. Neither should we.
Forbes is not a commie pinko rag. It describes itself this way: "Forbes is a leading source for reliable business news and financial information." The picture below is in he article.
U.S. missiles at a new NATO base in far eastern Europe. Designed to ward off an Iran attack
I recently completed a blog post at the request of a Russian corespondent. Four of the five Russian freestyle wrestlers who will compete in the London Olympics come from the Caspian Littoral mentioned in the article and all train in the Autonomous Republic of Dagestan, Russia; armed Islamists are fomenting insurrection in that area; a number of the Autonomous Republics in Russia are Turkic speaking and are restlessly longing for independence; Afghanistan's Northern Alliance speaks a version of Persian that is comprehensible in Iran, and Herat -- Afghanistan's most secure province -- is allied with Iran; Syria is aligned with Iran, a as are other counties and groups in West Asia.
On of the things we fail to catch is that Russia is as much at war with Islamists as we are.
It is, in my view, an understatement to say that "the region and the whole international society would suffer since Afghanistan, West Asia and North Africa are all undergoing a turbulent period", if War with Iran were to start.
Those who think in geopolitical terms such as the Forbes article make a valuable contribution to our understanding of the World we live in. I read what they write and learn from them. I value their contributions to our understanding. They have a failing, which, to them, is not a failing at all but a toughness necessary to see the world clearly. They do not describe the human cost of War. I count that as a significant failing -- particularly as they, generally, do not pay that kind of price. Something about that cost of a War with Iran is missing in the discussion. Something of value is missing to the discussion. Watch here.
Negotiate. Give Russia the assurances it requires.
.jpg)
.jpg)
+shows+Besik+Kudukhov+a+good+time19492.jpg)
.jpg)
+def.+chase+pami_r3p4523.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
-1.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
