Antonov said the situation in Ukraine is not on the agenda of Russia and the United States

Ambassador Antonov: Russia and the United States did not discuss the situation in Ukraine at the talks in Geneva It was only mentioned during the Russia-NATO Council meeting in Brussels as a secondary issue, Ambassador said

Russia and the United States did not discuss the situation in Ukraine during the talks in Geneva, Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov said, his words are quoted on the page of the Russian diplomatic mission on Facebook.

“This issue was not on the agenda of Russian-American negotiations in Geneva, but was only mentioned as a secondary topic in consultations with NATO in Brussels»— he said.

Russia is trying to obtain security guarantees from NATO, primarily concerning the refusal to move the alliance to the east. On January 10, 12 and 13, Russia held talks with the United States and its allies in NATO and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). However, no compromise was reached.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that Russia cannot veto Ukraine's entry into the alliance.

President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said that Russia needs “precisely legal, legal guarantees,” since the West has not fulfilled its verbal obligations: NATO will not move east.

December 17, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced the draft treaties with the United States on security assurances; and agreements on security arrangements with NATO. They relate, in particular, to guarantees that the alliance will not move further to the east, the concentration of strike offensive weapons systems near the borders, the accession to the alliance of states that were previously part of the USSR, including Ukraine, the conduct of any military activity on the territory of Ukraine, as well as other states of Eastern Europe. , Transcaucasia and Central Asia.

After unsuccessful negotiations with the US and NATO, Russia requested a written response to its proposals.

Follow RBC on Twitter Get news faster than anyone

< img class="aligncenter" src="" alt="Antonov said that the situation in Ukraine is not on the agenda of Russia and the United States"/>


Political scientists have proposed exotic methods of answering Russia to the United States

From new bases under the US nose to artificial tsunami near California

After the completion of the main negotiations between Russia and the US, NATO and the OSCE, it became clear to everyone that the situation had reached a dead end. As expected, the West did not accept our proposals. The NATO Secretary General hints at the reality of membership of Ukraine, Georgia, Sweden and Finland in NATO. Political scientists and military experts spoke about how Russia should behave in such a situation and how events could develop.

Photo: Gennady Cherkasov

The editor-in-chief of the National Defense magazine, Igor Korotchenko, in his Telegram channel, proposed to start by placing special forces bases in Nicaragua and Cuba, along with mixed air squadrons. In Cuban Cienfuegos, in his opinion, it would be worthwhile to place a naval base capable of receiving warships and submarines armed with Caliber and Zircon cruise missiles. True, Korotchenko did not specify how ready Cuba is for such an option.

Aleksey Kiryatsev, an expert at the Ukrainian Center for Analytics and Security, believes that “the Kremlin is preparing another conflict that could be a blow to the image of the United States as a world leader, and NATO as an organization capable of ensuring peace in Europe.” Namely… set fire to the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Like, for this, President Putin is purposefully pumping weapons into Serbia.

Apparently, the Ukrainian expert “forgot” who in 1999 fired on Belgrade with cruise missiles and cluster bombs and who was then categorically against this operation.

Chairman of the Presidium of the All-Russian Organization “Officers of Russia”, Hero of the Russian Federation, Major General Sergei Lipova believes that the security of our borders is under threat. We allegedly tried to negotiate peacefully, but this did not lead to anything. The Western powers, in his opinion, took into account only their own interests for too long and became insolent, so “the time has come for Russia to defend its principles.”

“Our task is to prevent the provocation of conflicts on our borders. Now it all depends on how far the West is ready to go in its provocations,” he told MK.

But political scientist Yury Baranchik in his Telegram channel suggested using weapons based on new physical principles – climatic, seismic, causing an earthquake or an artificial tsunami somewhere off the coast of California. That's when, he believes, everyone will immediately get worried and begin to agree on security issues.


In the United States, Russia allowed an attempt to invade Ukraine with the help of sabotage

Sullivan: intelligence assumes that Russia will “fabricate” a pretext for the invasion of Ukraine Such information, according to the assistant to the President of the United States, has intelligence. They admitted that Russia would try to “fabricate” a pretext for invading Ukraine, accusing Kiev of preparing an attack on its troops

Jake Sullivan

US intelligence has evidence that Russia intends to “fake” pretext for “invasion” to Ukraine, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said during a briefing.

“Our intelligence community is processing data that Russia is working to fabricate a pretext for an invasion, including sabotage and information operations, accusing Ukraine of preparing an attack on Russian forces in eastern Ukraine, — he said, pointing out that Secretary of State Anthony Blinken spoke about it. Sullivan recalled that the US “saw it in 2014.” He also noted that the United States would be ready to voice data on the Russian “scenario” against Ukraine in the next 24 hours.

According to him, the threat of “invasion” Russia into Ukraine “remains high”, although US intelligence has not yet come to a definite opinion about Moscow's intentions.

Sullivan noted that in the event of Russian military aggression against Ukraine, Washington is ready to strengthen the defense of its allies in Eastern Europe. “We have been clear both to Russia and publicly about several other options, and these include changes in military forces and capabilities that the US and NATO will deploy to the allies on the eastern flank in order to strengthen and strengthen the reliability of the allies’ defenses on their territory,” ; he explained.

In addition, the United States will “substantially strengthen” the support they are now providing to Ukraine, the assistant to the President of the United States warned.

At the same time, he stressed that Washington is in favor of a diplomatic solution to the Ukrainian issue, however, if Moscow decides to go the other way, the United States will “respond accordingly”.

Earlier, the media wrote that the United States would provide $200 million in military assistance to Ukraine, which the administration of President Joe Biden approved secretly. It has such powers over a state that is “in danger.” As part of its support for Ukraine, Washington will give it a radar system and maritime equipment, Politico wrote. CNN, in turn, reported that the new aid package provides for the sending of the same defensive equipment as before, including small arms, ammunition, protected radio stations, medical equipment.

In addition, the United States reported that it was studying the option of sending military to the countries of Eastern Europe, if relations between Russia and Ukraine escalate even more, up to a military confrontation.

The Russian authorities have repeatedly denied the intention to invade the territory of Ukraine. Moscow claims. that she has no “aggressive plans”; in relation to other states and emphasizes that the movement of troops on its territory does not pose a threat.

Subscribe to VK RBC Get news faster than anyone else


Ryabkov saw no reason for a new round of talks with the United States

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that Russia “will not buckle” under Western sanctions The Deputy Foreign Minister said that the West had responded with a virtual refusal to Russian proposals on security guarantees and non-expansion of NATO. Russia, according to Sergei Ryabkov, “has nowhere to retreat”

Sergei Ryabkov

Moscow has no reason for a new round of negotiations with Washington on security guarantees in the near future. This was stated by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov in an interview with RTVI TV channel.

“ I don't see any reason to sit down in the coming days (at the negotiating table. & mdash; RBK ), to meet again and start these very discussions, '' & mdash; Ryabkov said.

The main problem, he said, was that the United States and NATO “ under no guise, for any reason '' do not agree to Russia's demands not to expand the alliance and return its borders to the 1997 borders, as well as to provide “ legally binding guarantees that the relevant systems will not be located in the immediate vicinity of our borders. ''

He specified, that the United States and its allies actually responded with “ no '' in response to key Russian proposals for security guarantees; and want to discuss only those issues that interest them. “ And where they tell us 'yes, let's discuss further,' we, in turn, note that for all the importance and seriousness of these particular subjects, they are secondary to the same non-expansion of NATO. This is, to a certain extent, a dead end or a difference in approaches '', & mdash; noted the Deputy Minister.

He stressed that at the talks, Russia's opponents expressed their readiness to discuss those topics that are convenient for them. “ For us, this is not an option, because we are interested in the opposite. We need first of all what I said, and the rest goes in addition, '', & mdash; Ryabkov said.

At the same time, the diplomat noted, “ Americans want & lt; & hellip; & gt; let off steam from the Russian position, relieve pressure, relieve tension '' and, under the guise of this, “ continue the same process of geopolitical, military development of more and more territories, approaching further and further to Moscow. ''

“ We have nowhere to retreat. We already see that other measures, other methods will be applied in relation to opponents in the future, if they do not ultimately take into account our requirements and our needs, '' & mdash; added by the deputy minister.

The diplomat said that Russia will not bend under the pressure of possible new US sanctions and will find alternatives to its existence. “ We will find alternatives … Russia has never buckled under pressure, never succumbed to threats and blackmail, '' & mdash; Ryabkov said.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in an interview with Channel One; called the results of the talks on security guarantees a reflection of “ serious confrontations in the world arena, an attempt by the West to assert its dominance. ''

Negotiations between Russia and the United States on security guarantees were held in Geneva on January 9 & ndash; January 10, January 12 in Brussels meeting of the Council Russia & mdash; NATO, which discussed, in particular, the non-expansion of the alliance to the east.

On the eve it became known that American senators proposed, in the event of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, to impose sanctions against the Russian leadership, the national debt, the banking sector and Nord Stream -2 & raquo ;.

Subscribe to FB RBC Receive news faster than anyone


Political scientists predicted adversity-2022: coronavirus, White House and rising prices

Next year, foreign policy will largely determine domestic policy

At the beginning of the New Year, 2022, we decided to find out how political scientists see it. It is clear that none of them traditionally wants to act as oracles, and therefore we asked them not what would happen, but which of the quite obvious events or trends could become decisive for domestic politics and the political situation around Russia next year.


-The most important thing is negotiations with the US and NATO, which are related to foreign policy, but will certainly influence domestic policy too: this will concern Ukraine , security guarantees (for Russia – auth .), etc.

The second important event, it now determines everything, is the question of ending the pandemic: is Omicron a new wave of the pandemic, or is it its final act, what will be the mortality rate, will there be a need for more tightening (antikoid measures – auth .), etc. For a long time this issue did not play a big role in the domestic policy of Russia, but at Putin's press conference at the end of last year it became clear that this had already reached the highest level: protests of some part of the population, political forces, including against restrictive measures related to the pandemic.

The third is the issue of inflation, price increases, world price conditions, primarily for food. The fourth question is, of course, energy prices, the entire energy situation.

And there is no getting away from this, much will depend on what is happening in the United States. Therefore, the most important topic for all countries, and Russia in particular, is what will happen in November at the midterm elections, and whether they will be the threshold of some serious civil confrontation in the United States, as a result of which events that are important for all countries, without exception, may occur. This, of course, is the question of the dollar, the need to create some new reserve currencies, at least in the context of the crisis in the United States, and the general situation in the world, due to the fact that the question of power in the United States is suspended – in relation to 24- m year, and this will already be indicated in the 22nd.

It is difficult to say about other important circumstances. It is obvious that party life has come to a standstill a little (in Russia – auth .). It is there, but … “New people” only reveal their own face. It is clear that mainstream political life does not concern parties.

-The Geneva Treaty is designated as a starting point. Although I do not hope that there will be some kind of reset in relations with the United States and NATO. Given what has been said, it is clear that in relations with the United States and the collective West, much is determined by their reaction to Russia's demands for security guarantees. But since this story is unlikely to end with some kind of breakthrough, we will expect the concept of a besieged fortress, in which we all find ourselves, which means that we cannot expect some kind of democratization in the country, or neutralization.

Moreover, it is quite obvious that since the president's press conference was criticized against the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, related to the party's position on vaccination and quar-coding, it is clear that the Communist Party will remain under pressure.

There will be few elections this year. Probably the key and most noticeable ones are municipal in Moscow. But here pressure on the Communist Party of the Russian Federation can backfire, strengthen the position of the Communist Party, it can become a beneficiary, because here it looks like the main opposition party and the beneficiary of the protest vote.

From the point of view of the economy, the main question that may be asked this year is whether it will be possible to keep the price level and what will happen with the growth of incomes of the population. At the press conference, it was sounded that a stake is being made on three development tools: digitalization – I completely agree, increasing labor productivity – who is against it, and infrastructure projects. But they are troubling because these projects often do not create jobs for Russians. The infrastructure is being built by guest workers, who eventually transfer money abroad. That is, the allocation of money for infrastructure projects does not mean that there will be an increase in the income of the population. And the sounded positive assessment of the Central Bank's policy says that tough monetary policy is considered correct. This means that we are talking about curbing the growth of incomes or pensions, so as not to unwind inflation. I wish there was a middle ground.

With regard to politics. It is clear that it is important to implement the law on a unified system of organizing power. It is very interesting how effectively the new system will be built, how the regions will react to it, because the country is diverse, it is difficult to sew everyone using the same patterns or to heal according to the same recipes. In fact, we have completed the transition from federalism to a centralized unitary state. Now the federal authorities are responsible for everything. Relatively speaking, a power vertical has been built in which it is impossible to push everything onto bad mayors or bad governors, it is impossible to appoint switchmen, because this is a unified system of public power. At the head is the president. How this will affect the work of the authorities is an interesting question.

An equally interesting question is whether political competition will develop in our country. Or criticism of the Communist Party, etc. says that it is coming to an end, because it is not the time to compete with each other, when it is necessary to unite and unite in the face of pressure on Russia from outside. In addition, the regions were given the opportunity to abandon the proportional-majority system in favor of the majority system, and to reduce the proportion of party lists, or even abandon them altogether. That is, will it not finally finish off the party system of Russia.

Well, as for the long-term planning, which the president spoke about. It seems to me that there is a big problem with the image of the future. And the next year could be devoted to finding or promoting an image of a real future that can be trusted, which will return people to the optimism lost during the pandemic.

And again, I would like to believe that the pandemic will end this year, because it affects literally everything. After all, for example, the pandemic was the reason for the introduction of three-day and electronic voting. At the same time, it is important to understand that people no longer believe so much in the value of stability, since some already have nothing to lose, and the demand for change, one way or another, is growing. The question is how the government will respond to this request. The nightingale is not fed with fables. How much money has been invested in raising wealth is interesting, but people are interested in how much money is in their wallets and what prices are in stores.

– Decisive actions by Russia to ensure its security in the direction of Ukraine. This will be the main event that will largely determine the future fate. This is an event on the scale of the one that happened in 2014. It is most likely that Russia will recognize the DPR and LPR, and will deploy its troops there as a guarantee of security. Will it recognize the DPR and LPR according to the version of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, or according to the version of Crimea – that is, recognition, and in a few days acceptance into Russia, will it recognize them within the current borders, or within the boundaries of the current Donetsk and Luhansk regions? But for this it will be necessary to defeat the grouping of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. But these are completely different events.

Either it will be only the DPR and LPR, or the North Crimean Canal will also be unblocked, which is quite logical: if the grouping of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is defeated, why not carry out the unblocking of Crimea. If control is taken not only over Mariupol, but also over Kherson, then the question arises why not take control over the entire coast (Ukrainian – auth .) Of the Black Sea and go to Transnistria in order to resolve this problem. And that means that Odessa goes to Russia one way or another. And if Odessa leaves, then why leave Kharkov? In which, if there is a free referendum, 80% will vote for reunification with Russia.

How much the armed forces will be used, how much the West will be included, how strong the sanctions will be, these are the main events that will determine the future fate of Russia. The lack of tough action, after such an ultimatum, which Putin presented, will also have serious consequences.

The influence of elections and party processes is 2-3 orders of magnitude less. The modern Russian party system functions normally, a small part of the opposition is fixed within the framework of the completely non-radical parties of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the SR, and the Liberal Democratic Party. Events will take place there. First, there is an attack on the Communist Party of the Russian Federation – a conflict has arisen with the leadership of the party. In addition, a new type of party has been created – New People. This is a cyborg party, an artificial education. Now, according to the version of such a cyborg, a combination of digital technologies and living people, they will try to reformat other parties as well. Now the reformatting of the SR is clearly taking place, a new group has been introduced there, mainly political strategists, with the help of which this will be done. The same is the Liberal Democratic Party, with Lebedev's departure they will try to seize the moment. Plus the Communist Party of the Russian Federation will also be reformatted. These processes will be very active. To what extent it will be possible, I do not know.

The influence of covid as a factor will increase. This is due to the fact that the antwaxers managed to defeat the authorities, they were forced to yield. Maria Shukshina has more subscribers than Margarita Simonyan, and almost like Vladimir Solovyov. The authorities wanted to introduce quar codes on transport, but there was such a powerful attack on the deputies that they broke down: spare us, this is another decision, like raising the retirement age, we will not be forgiven. I don’t know what they will do. Maybe the decoy Cossacks will lead the anti-Vasser movement, or maybe they will be banned, or they will establish a dialogue with them, create places for them in the Public Chambers. This is perhaps the first time that some social groups have been able to defeat the authorities in recent years. People are tired, the problem will be very difficult to solve.


CNN learned that the United States in December approved military aid to Ukraine for $ 200 million

CNN: US Secretly Approves $ 200 Million Additional Military Aid to Ukraine On December 11, NBC reported that Washington had frozen a $ 200 million aid package to Kiev. At the same time, the United States expressed its readiness to provide the country with an expanded aid package in the event of Russian aggression

The US administration has approved an additional $ 200 million in military aid to Ukraine, CNN correspondent Kylie Atwood reported, citing four sources.

“[US President Joe] Biden’s administration secretly approved an additional $ 200 million of military aid to Ukraine at the end of December [2021] & raquo;, & mdash; tweeted Atwood.

It is not specified what exactly is included in the new package of measures.

On December 11, NBC, citing sources, reported that the United States had prepared a package of military assistance to Ukraine in the amount of $ 200 million, but suspended the process of its delivery in order to provide an opportunity for a diplomatic settlement of the situation between Russia and Ukraine. At the same time, the American administration considered other measures of military assistance, including their expanded package, in the event of a Russian invasion.

Biden, during a video conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin on December 7, announced that Washington would increase military assistance to Kiev in the event of a Russian invasion.

In December, the State Border Service of Ukraine announced that the United States would allocate $ 20 million to strengthen the borders with Russia and Belarus.

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said in early January that NATO would strengthen its positions in countries bordering on Russia if it attacks Ukraine. The United States allowed the dispatch of military personnel to Eastern European countries in the event of an aggravation of the situation.

At the end of last year, some Western media outlets, based on data on the accumulation of Russian military equipment and troops on the border, wrote that Russia was preparing to attack Ukraine. The American authorities have repeatedly warned Moscow about possible tough sanctions in the event of military aggression against Ukraine. The Russian side, in turn, has repeatedly denied information about the impending attack.

In talks with Biden, Putin said that NATO was “ making dangerous attempts to conquer Ukrainian territory. '' The Russian leader said that the country is interested in obtaining “ reliable, legally fixed guarantees excluding NATO expansion eastward. ''

In December, the Foreign Ministry sent proposals on security guarantees to the United States and the alliance. These proposals were discussed by the Russian and American sides in Geneva on January 9 – 10, 2022. On January 12, Russia will discuss this issue at a meeting with NATO representatives in Brussels, and on the 13th – & mdash; at the OSCE meeting.

Subscribe to Instagram RBC Receive news faster than anyone


The political scientist spoke about the possible reaction of Russia to the reluctance of the United States to negotiate

“The appearance of a missile base in Cuba is unlikely”

In Geneva, negotiations between Russia and the United States began on security guarantees for our country. A meeting of the Russia-NATO Council is scheduled for January 12. I would like to hope for a positive outcome of the meetings, however, in light of the tough position of the parties, the success of the negotiations is questionable. What will Moscow do if its proposals are rejected? MK asked Vasily Kashin, Deputy Director of the Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics, to answer this question.

Photo: AP

– Our military-technical response will consist, as an option, in the deployment of new types of weapons in the European part of Russia. Perhaps in Belarus. A revision of doctrinal attitudes can be expected. For example, the large-scale deployment of ground-based medium-range missiles that could reach many European capitals. After the destruction on the initiative of the United States of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, Russia may, for example, create a similar ballistic missile with a hypersonic maneuvering warhead.

The second option is to lower the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons, deploy additional nuclear groups in European part of the country.

– Arms deliveries are going on anyway. It hardly makes sense to sell them weapons specifically in response to events in Europe. The deterioration of relations with NATO will naturally affect our military cooperation with China, but not so much.

– The situation is similar with Iran. Regardless of the development of events in the dialogue with NATO, Russia strives to maintain military-technical cooperation with Iran. The problem here is that Iran has little money and is under even more severe sanctions than Russia. There will be problems with financial calculations. Plus, he has a complex system for making such decisions, which is why contracts are often delayed. For example, in the “zero” years, negotiations on the supply of S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems went on for more than seven years.

– In Syria, we are just trying to avoid various incidents that could lead to the death of American servicemen. Such incidents are extremely dangerous. Do not forget that retaliatory actions may follow. In addition, our military presence in the Middle East is much smaller than the American one. And it has nothing to do with the problems in Europe.

– It is far from the fact that the Cubans will want this. And there is no guarantee that this base will make a lot of sense, unless we deploy a large military group there. This is ten thousand people at least. A separate base with several missiles is unlikely to influence anything. Will we pull a serious option? I doubt it.

– This issue has been raised by our side several times, but I have not heard it raised within the framework of security guarantees. You can revise them, but together with the existing requirements, this will most likely lead to the failure of the negotiations.


The factor that complicated the negotiations between the Russian Federation and the United States in Geneva was named

“Kazakhstan can replace Ukraine in Russian-American relations”

Russian-American consultations on security guarantees have started in Geneva. The central issue is the draft treaty that Russia sent to the United States and its allies in mid-December. It includes provisions on reducing the number of military exercises, mutual non-deployment of medium and shorter-range missiles in each other's reach and refusing to further expand NATO at the expense of the post-Soviet republics. The political scientist told how the events in Kazakhstan will affect the negotiation process.

Photo: AP

The meeting of the Russian Federation and the United States in Geneva is held in a closed format. The Russian delegation was led by Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Fomin, and the American delegation by the United States First Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman.

The sides held preliminary talks in the format of a working dinner the day before. The deputy head of the Russian foreign policy department noted that the conversation was difficult, but businesslike.

Even before the start of the negotiation process, the United States emphasized that some of Russia's proposals were unacceptable to them. Moscow, in turn, stated that the project was not of an ultimatum nature, however, the country would not agree to unilateral concessions, especially under pressure. Nevertheless, Ryabkov did not rule out that consultations with the American side would be limited to one meeting and there would be no point in continuing them. However, according to him, this threatens a new round of confrontation.

As a reminder, the talks on security guarantees will be held in three stages: on January 12, two days after the meeting in Geneva, a meeting of the Russia-NATO Council will take place in Brussels, and the next day – consultations at the Vienna platform of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

“Today we can say with complete confidence that the situation in Kazakhstan and, in particular, the introduction of Russian troops into the territory of this country, influenced the consultations between the Russian Federation and the United States on security guarantees in the most negative way,” the chief researcher of the Institute comments on MK. USA and Canada RAS Vladimir Vasiliev. – Although the American delegation does not directly link these factors, the shadow of Kazakhstani events will constantly hang over the negotiating table in Geneva, Brussels and Vienna.

The United States, judging by its preliminary reaction, has not yet reached far-reaching conclusions about this situation. And she is becoming more and more unpredictable every day. The Americans still need to figure out what is happening in Kazakhstan and understand what steps to take when the wave of violence subsides. ”

According to the expert, the Kazakh factor is of a double nature for Washington. On the one hand, even before the New Year, Russia declared that if it did not receive advising guarantees from the United States and NATO regarding its security, it would act quite decisively. And in the West, in this case, they understood, given the concentration of troops around the Ukrainian border, that the Russian Federation could use force at any moment.

“Unexpectedly, the situation in Kazakhstan showed that Moscow, in order to ensure its vital national interests, can in fact use forceful methods and that this, of course, must be reckoned with,” the political scientist continues. “Therefore, today Kazakhstan in Russian-American relations can, in a sense, replace Ukraine. The United States understands that it must be extremely careful and careful with Russia, and that its claims were not born out of nowhere.

On the other hand, the Russian side has long and consistently denied that it could use force against Ukraine. This, of course, was not believed in Washington. Many American analysts have repeatedly noted that such a step can only complicate the prospects for the conclusion of guarantees, the prospects for which have become rather dim in recent years.

Moreover, the West understands very well that the guarantees it can give are not a panacea for the fact that Russia will not use forceful methods, believing that in case of any changes in the situation on the world stage, it can rely on a legal document, and not on its own.

In any case, Kazakhstan has changed the prospects for the current round of negotiations, which began on January 10 and will end by the end of the week. And today the main discussion rests on yet another serious problem, which is related to the intentions and goals of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Until the end of the year, it was clear that the talks between Moscow and Washington would focus exclusively on security elements. That is to say, the form corresponded to the content, and the documents that were sent to the USA and NATO were self-contained. However, today in America they do not quite understand what exactly the Russian leader wants.

According to most Western analysts, the whole idea of ​​these negotiations is connected with Putin's desire to leave a significant mark on history. Today, these agreements are his attempt to remain in the memory of Russians and the chronicles of the Russian Federation as a great political figure. This is the strategic plan of the Russian leader and determines the policy of 2014 in relation to Crimea, and now in relation to Kazakhstan.

And in this regard, the Western powers found themselves at a crossroads. They do not understand whether it is now necessary to meet Putin halfway, because this will only strengthen his prestige both inside the country and abroad.

And Kazakhstan has just shown that the Russian leader has strategic goals. It is about strengthening Russia's influence in the post-Soviet space. And the West, of course, would not like to help Putin in this.

Since the negotiations are partly linked to Putin's goals regarding his political future and place in history, the United States is in some kind of confusion. They do not know how to behave in these matters. Whether it is necessary to counteract or to turn a blind eye to it. In any case, this adds uncertainty to the situation. The West has not yet figured out the strategy of the Russian leader's behavior, which is undoubtedly a factor paralyzing the effectiveness of the Geneva talks. ”


The Foreign Ministry called the dialogue with the United States uncomfortable because of the “eyes and ears” of their partners

Washington is uncomfortable with conducting a dialogue with Moscow, including on security guarantees, since it feels “ eyes and ears '' behind it; their Russophobic partners in NATO. About this in an interview with RIA Novosti said Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov.

“ They are uncomfortable with bilateral dialogue with us, because they feel behind them the eyes and ears of the most anti-Russian group in NATO, '' & mdash; he said.

The material is being supplemented

Subscribe to RBC's Instagram Get news faster than anyone

Russian Ambassador to the United States explained where the jihadists in Kazakhstan came from

According to the Russian ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov, several thousand jihadists took part in mass protests in Kazakhstan, where they tried undermine the country's constitutional order.

The diplomat added on his Facebook page that radicals professing a misanthropic ideology had attacked Kazakhstan. Thousands of jihadists and looters tried to undermine the constitutional order by using weapons against civilians.

Antonov explained that this situation arose due to the fact that Washington withdrew its military contingent from Afghanistan, as a result of which the region became rapidly spread extremist ideas and trends.

“What can you talk about with people who decapitate police officers ?! Any negotiations with terrorists only encourage them to commit even more serious crimes. I am sure that Washington is well aware of this, but they do not want to give up double standards, “he said.


Defense Ministers of Great Britain and the United States discussed the situation on the border of Russia and Ukraine


British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace and his American counterpart Lloyd Austin discussed the Russian-attributed military build-up on the border yesterday with Ukraine. This was reported in the Pentagon's press service.

The press secretary of the department, John Kirby, noted that the ministers during the conversation touched upon topics that “cause concern”, namely, “the build-up of Russian forces on the Ukrainian borders.”/p>

“Austin and Wallace reaffirmed their unwavering support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. Among other things, they pledged to continue close coordination on these issues, “Kirby specified.

Recall that recently Western countries have been claiming a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine. Earlier, the press secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov said that such information is empty and unfounded.


Experts linked protests in Kazakhstan with upcoming talks between Russia and the United States

“Americans struck the first blow”

The protests in Kazakhstan, according to political scientists, are not only an internal affair of this country, but also have an international connotation. The President of Kazakhstan, Kassym-Zhomart Tokayev, made concessions and announced a price cut, but the unrest after that not only did not stop, but even intensified. Is the “Ukrainian scenario” possible in Kazakhstan? Yuri Lyamin, a military expert and co-author of the Allies book of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST), answered this question to MK.

Photo: Still from video

“Now it is difficult to predict the development of the situation. But it is already clear that in the event of further destabilization, various external players will try to take advantage of this for their own purposes, – said Yuri Lyamin. “Kazakhstan is of great strategic importance not only for Russia, but also for China, therefore our foreign policy opponents and rivals can make great efforts to develop the situation in a negative way for us.”

A similar opinion is shared by the Belarusian political scientist Alexander Shpakovsky, who published his observations on Telegram.

“Of course, no one expected protests in Kazakhstan, but it cannot be said that these events greatly surprised anyone. Such situations always have prerequisites: in Kazakhstan, there is an acute problem of social differentiation, and the degree of corruption of local authorities is very high, the political scientist states. – Only Nursultan Nazarbayev could balance this explosive mixture. But recently, footage went to the public space where people saw for the first time that the Elbasy (Nazarbayev's title, translated from Kazakh as “leader of the nation” – “MK”) is actually very weak. ”

As a result, “peaceful protests” were not long in coming, the political scientist notes. “It is safe to say,” wrote Alexander Shpakovsky, “that the underground infrastructure was very well prepared. The danger also lies in the fact that the ideas of nationalism and Islamic extremism are very often the outlet of protest energy for many people. ” , thereby trying to either divert forces and means from the Ukrainian direction, or to disperse Russian forces as much as possible. ”

“ Given the importance of Kazakhstan in the context of Russia's interests in Central Asia, it is possible that forces will have to The Collective Security Treaty Organization, which includes Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Armenia, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, “said Alexander Shpakovsky.

In Kazakhstan, the increase in fuel prices provoked riots: shots of pogroms

See the related photo gallery


Putin told Biden about the severance of relations with the United States in the event of new sanctions

Russian leader Vladimir Putin pointed out during telephone conversations with US President Joe Biden that Moscow could completely break off relations between the two countries. if the promised “large-scale unprecedented sanctions” are introduced.

This was announced by the aide to the head of the Russian state Yuri Ushakov. According to him, Putin noted that it would be a major mistake.

Ushakova stressed that the essence of the last conversation was different, in order to continue the exchange of views on the issues that “seriously concern Russia.” “. Ushakov replied that so far this does not imply anything, so it is not known what “large-scale sanctions” are.


iNews: Putin’s prophecy about the fate of the United States began to come true


The coronavirus has become a symbol of the deepest crisis that befell the social, political and economic spheres in the United States. The United States is now in many ways similar to the Soviet Union and runs the risk of repeating its fate. The problems were aggravated by both the ex-president of the country, Donald Trump, who refused to recognize the danger of a pandemic in time, and his successor, Joseph Biden.

This was stated by experts from the Chinese edition of iNews. The translation of their article was published by PolitRussia. Instead of solving internal problems, Biden launched a “crusade” against China and Russia.

The withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan was perceived by the Americans as a defeat. The President does not pay due attention to the problem of the pandemic, which provoked a crisis of power. For a long time, Republicans and Democrats could not resolve the issue of increasing the limit of borrowed funds. The country is under threat of default.

Americans no longer believe that they made the right choice, and in 2024 Donald Trump will have a real chance to win in the elections.

The United States is on the verge of a serious crisis, which Russian President Vladimir Putin warned about. In the summer of 2021, at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, he called the United States itself the main adversary of the United States. He noted their similarity with the late Soviet Union. Washington, like Moscow 30 years ago, ignores internal problems and is approaching a complete collapse of the country.

At the same time, the majority of Americans (60%) divide their country by state – into “reds” (controlled by the Republican Party) and the blues (Democratic Party). In the last elections, the confrontation between them reached its climax. Republicans even tried to seize the Capitol by force on January 6.

iNews reporters came to the conclusion that Putin's prophecy is beginning to come true.

Read also US experts: Russia drew conclusions from the collapse of the Soviet Union


Plan “Dropshot”: the United States was preparing to start a nuclear war on January 1

“Destroy most of the population of the USSR”

Exactly 65 years ago, on January 1, 1957, according to the secret plan “Dropshot”, approved by the Committee of the Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces, was supposed to begin nuclear war between America and the USSR, smoothly turning into the Third World War. As it turns out, similar plans still exist today.


According to Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu , American strategic bombers from the territory of Ukraine, literally 20 km from our state border, are practicing the use of nuclear weapons at Russian facilities.

MK decided to remind why 65 years ago this New Year's nuclear apocalypse did not take place. And also about who and what “nuclear plans” are in place for the current 2022.

The atomic sword of Damocles

From the moment the United States acquired atomic weapons, the USSR immediately turned into a potential object of its use. The first atomic bomb, as you know, was made by the United States. They started working on it back in 1943 on the Manhattan project. The work was carried out under the guidance of the German physicist Robert Oppenheimer. In 1945, the first test of a new weapon took place in the US state of New Mexico. And already in August 1945 bombs “Baby” and “Fat Man” were dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

From a military point of view, then it made no sense. The bombing became a demonstration of the capabilities of the United States specifically for the USSR. And very soon the former ally in the anti-Hitler coalition began planning atomic bombings on Soviet cities.

In October 1945, the Americans began work on the secret military plan, Totality. It was developed by order of US President Harry Truman at the headquarters of American General Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Some call it preventive, some call it defensive. Allegedly, the purpose of the appearance of this plan is to mislead the USSR about the real possibilities of the United States. What was needed was the illusion of a large number of atomic bombs in the Pentagon's arsenal. In fact, the United States had few of them – just a few.

According to the Totality plan, there were 20 Soviet cities in the list of US atomic bomb targets: Moscow, Gorky (Nizhny Novgorod), Kazan, Leningrad (St. Petersburg), Baku, Tashkent, Chelyabinsk, Nizhny Tagil, Magnitogorsk, Saratov, Molotov (Perm) , Tbilisi, Stalinsk (Novokuznetsk), Grozny, Kuibyshev (Samara), Sverdlovsk (Yekaterinburg), Novosibirsk, Omsk, Irkutsk, Yaroslavl.

The plan could not be implemented, including due to the strengthening of air defense (air defense) in the USSR.

Until 1949, the United States remained the only country in the world with atomic weapons. And all this time of the atomic monopoly in the USA more and more new plans of strikes against the USSR appeared: the “Pincher” plan – March-June 1946; Broiler – 1947; Bushwecker, Crankshaft, Houghmoon, Fleetwood, Cogwill, Offtech, Chariotir – all 1948; “Trojan” and “Dropshot” – the plans of 1949.

300 targets in the USSR

In March 1946, former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill made his famous speech at Westminster College Fulton, where he stated that the Anglo-Saxons should have absolute military superiority over the USSR. The Soviet Union and the United States, which until recently together celebrated the victory over the Hitlerite Reich, openly turned into military opponents. Soon the term “cold war” appeared and with it the nuclear arms race began.

In three years. In 1949, the US under Harry Truman approved the Dropshot plan. It provided for the delivery of multiple nuclear strikes against the main geopolitical enemy – the USSR. By this time, the number of atomic bombs in the United States was already approaching 300. The Dropshot plan envisioned dropping them onto Russian facilities in such numbers as to destroy most of the population and 85% of the country's industrial potential. In addition to nuclear weapons, the plan also provided for the use of chemical and bacteriological weapons.

There were no heavy missiles at that time. The bombs were to be dropped on our cities by American B-29 “Superfortress” bombers.

The existence of the Dropshot plan became known only in 1978, when it was declassified under US President Jimmy Carter. The date for the start of a nuclear war under this plan was January 1, 1957. The reason is an act of aggression by the USSR or its allies against one of the countries friendly to the United States.

Does it remind you of anything from today? For example, shouts from Washington and NATO countries about Russia's attack on Ukraine?

The Dropshot plan assumed that weapons of mass destruction would be used on both sides, causing the conflict to escalate into World War III. The Americans have divided the world in advance into their supporters, rivals and countries that will maintain relative neutrality.

They thwarted the plan

The scenario of the war according to the “Dropshot” plan assumed four main phases of the development of the conflict. First, a preventive bombardment by the Americans and their allies of objects on the territory of the USSR, ostensibly in order to prevent the advance of Soviet troops on one of the countries friendly to the United States.

If we compare those plans with a time period closer to us, then we can see that the Americans are not too resourceful in looking for reasons for unleashing a serious military conflict. A similar reason was chosen by them in March 1999 for the bombing of Yugoslavia. And today some American generals say that the events in Ukraine may become the trigger for the use of tactical nuclear weapons against Russia.

The second phase of the “Dropshot” is an offensive into the territory of the USSR along the entire front line. The next phase, according to the plan of American strategists, is the surrender of the Soviet army. In the end – the establishment of control over the territory of the USSR, the change of political power and order.

What ultimately prevented the implementation of this and similar plans? First of all, the fact that the USSR had its own atomic, and then a nuclear bomb. Powerful delivery vehicles were also created – the Tu-95 bomber. In 1957, the Tu-95 was put into service. The range exceeded 12 thousand km, which made it possible to deliver the “nuclear filling” directly to the US coast.

One of the Tu-95s was adapted for the thermonuclear 100-megaton Tsar Bomb, which was tested in 1961 on Novaya Zemlya.

In 1957, the USSR successfully tested the R-7 intercontinental ballistic missile, capable of delivering a megaton nuclear charge to an almost unlimited range. On October 4, 1957, this rocket launched the world's first artificial Earth satellite.


Today, relations between Russia and the United States are in many ways reminiscent of the times of the Cold War, when the American and Soviet military considered the possibility of using nuclear weapons during the phase of the “hot conflict”. Some Western politicians prefer not to remember the obvious axiom that there will be no winners in a nuclear war.

In the United States, it is practically forgotten after the new nuclear doctrine was adopted there under Trump. It no longer views nuclear weapons solely as a strategic deterrent. According to it, the use of tactical nuclear warheads during local conflicts is not ruled out as a decisive trump card that can change the military situation in favor of the United States.

In accordance with the new doctrine, the theater of operations with the use of tactical nuclear weapons should be located as far away from the United States as possible. And, of course, the warheads used should not be of the highest power. Based on these conditions, Europe is quite suitable for such a conflict. Moreover, American nuclear bombs B61 are stored on its territory in several countries, which are now being modernized, turning into high-precision guided weapons in the B61-12 version.

At the borders of Russia, strategic bombers of the US Air Force have become more active, which are practicing the tactics of delivering missile strikes on Russian territory. This also occurs in the waters of the Okhotsk Sea, and especially in the Black Sea region. Here, according to Russian Minister of War Shoigu, the situation “generally goes beyond certain limits: strategic bombers are flying at a distance of 20 km from our state border. They are known to carry very serious weapons. ” And in November, as Shoigu said, within the framework of the Global Thunder 22 exercise, ten US strategic bombers “practiced the option of using nuclear weapons against Russia practically simultaneously from the western and eastern directions.”

But if the situation had already reached this point , should the Russian military somehow react to such facts and oppose something to the American plans? Do we have any possible scenarios for adequately repelling nuclear aggression? And how does the Russian army, which has the most modern weapons in its arsenal, practice its response to a possible nuclear attack by the United States?

MK asked these questions to one of the leading experts in the field of nuclear weapons. His answer turned out to be somewhat unexpected and short.

– Everything you are asking about, – said the expert, – refers to top secret data. That is, directly to state secrets. I can only say: undoubtedly, such responses are being worked out and practiced. They are developed by the General Staff, and all types and types of troops are directly practiced. More detailed information on this matter is not subject to disclosure.

– Not. This is all very interconnected with the measures that can be applied today. Therefore, it is also a state secret. But this data is a serious taboo. Especially today, in the explosive situation that exists at the moment. So, apart from some empty words and all sorts of assumptions, you will not be able to publish anything.

But I assure you: we are, of course, considering possible response scenarios. This is multivariate planning. It goes in all these questions and directions. There are several dozen options that are included in the corresponding plans, but it is simply not possible to talk about them …

Perhaps this approach makes sense. Nothing is more frightening than the unknown. So let them be afraid. Only the fear of retaliation can stop a potential aggressor. Let their supercomputers calculate as much as they want where the Russian missiles will launch from, how they will fly and what targets will be covered in retaliatory and retaliatory oncoming strikes.


The chief infectious disease specialist in the United States expects a peak in the incidence of omicron at the end of January

Plot The spread of a new strain of coronavirus “omicron”

Director of the National Institute of Allergic and Infectious Diseases of the United States, Dr. Anthony Fauci, said that the peak incidence of the new strain of coronavirus omicron in the country is likely to happen at the end of January, CNBC reports.

“ I would assume, given the size of our country and the heterogeneous situation with vaccinations, that this process will most likely take more than a couple of weeks, probably , by the end of January, I think & raquo ;, & mdash; he said.

Earlier it became known that Russia & nbsp; created & nbsp; a test system for detecting coronavirus and determining the presence of the omicron strain.

Earlier, & nbsp; British doctors found out, & nbsp; that those infected with the omicron coronavirus strain people may experience head fog, which is sluggish, fuzzy and fuzzy thinking. At the same time, the omicron causes this condition from the very beginning of infection, and not after a long time, as is the case with other strains.


Putin: Russia will behave like the United States on security issues

Aide to the President of Russia Yuri Ushakov commented on Vladimir Putin's talks with American leader Joe Biden.

Photo: Natalia Gubernatorova

According to him, the interlocutors during the 50-minute conversation touched upon key topics of Russian-American relations.

Ushakov added that President Putin warned his American counterpart that Moscow intends to behave like Washington in matters of security.

“The President emphasized that in a rather difficult current situation, the Russian Federation will behave the way the United States would behave,” Ushakov said, quoted by RIA Novosti.


American reconnaissance plane flies over Donbass for three days: what the United States is striving for

We decided to find out how great the “Russian threat” is

The US reconnaissance plane has been patrolling Donbass for three days already: on December 27, it flew over Eastern Ukraine for the first time. The liner took off in Germany, then flew through Kiev almost to Kharkov and turned towards Severodonetsk, from where it proceeded along the line of contact with the LPR and DPR. Near Mariupol, he turned to the west, flew along the northern border of Crimea and returned to patrol the Donbass again. The experts explained to MK what goal the American intelligence officers had set for themselves.


– The flight of the reconnaissance plane over the Donbas proves the relevance of Russia's demands on the United States regarding the inadmissibility of NATO's eastward expansion. “They fly where it is not supposed to fly in order to determine the deployment of the defense forces of the DPR and LPR. Apparently, satellites are not enough for this. While the military is collecting information just to have it. Apparently, the troops understand that politicians can ask them for data on Donbass. In turn, politicians will need this information in order to decide whether to start a war, and if so, when and where exactly. In particular, this suggests that the United States has different opinions on how to deal with Ukraine, the expert told MK.

In turn, retired FSB general Alexander Mikhailov noted that the reconnaissance aircraft collects audiovisual information, monitors negotiations, records the presence of troops, and so on. However, according to him, this does not mean that Washington is preparing for war. “Over time, there will be more and more of these flights. The Americans want to understand the real situation in Donbass, because the speculative conclusions of various experts contradict what is happening in practice. As a result, the world periodically falls into hysterics due to the allegedly existing “Russian threat”. In this sense, trusting the Ukrainian authorities means plunging into lies and extortion of money. Moreover, the Ukrainians themselves do not know what they want from the DPR and LPR. They are not going to either release them or accept them back, “Mikhailov emphasized.

At the same time, the FSB general said that Russia is not going to attack Ukraine. He believes that Moscow does not want to wage a war on the territory of a foreign state at all. Nevertheless, Russia wants the citizens of Ukraine, who are not needed by their country, to become its citizens.

Recall that on December 30, the heads of Russia and the United States, Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden, are going to hold telephone talks at the initiative of the Russian side. They are expected to discuss the situation in Donbass and Russia's demand for NATO to ensure that it refuses to move to the East. And on January 10, Russian-American talks on strategic stability and security issues will take place. This will be followed by meetings of the NATO-Russia Council and the OSCE.


Russia and the United States left the EU aside from the January talks

Brussels will not affect relations between Moscow and Washington

The beginning of the upcoming 2022 runs the risk of not being full of festive events, at least in terms of the international agenda. As early as January 10, representatives of Russia and the United States have scheduled bilateral talks on security issues. The European Union also wished to “join” them. However, judging by the available information, other negotiating formats are envisaged for Brussels. The question is whether all the appointments will become really productive or will turn into a banal “checking of hours”, when everyone “stays with their own.”

Photo: Still from video

Talks between Moscow and Washington are scheduled for January 10 and are expected to take place in Geneva. The agenda of the upcoming meeting is extensive: it includes the expansion of NATO to the east – which in recent weeks has been called a threat by both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov – and the situation in Donbass, and much more.

Himself the format of the Moscow-Washington talks is not surprising in itself, but it was not without surprises: the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell, in an interview with the German newspaper Die Welt, said that Brussels did not intend to stand aside and would like to participate in the Russian-American process.

“We do not want and cannot afford to be outside spectators, through whose heads decisions are made,” the head of European diplomacy noted.

Meanwhile, as the head of the Center emphasized in a conversation with MK International Security Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexei ARBATOV , the European Union (like NATO) simply does not “attach itself” to the Russian-American dialogue on strategic stability.

“The North Atlantic Alliance and the EU are, of course, invisibly present in this process, but they are not directly involved in the negotiations,” the analyst noted. – We are now talking about the Russian-US meeting scheduled for January 10th. Another, broader Russia-NATO forum, appointed later, of course, includes the EU states, since among the 30 members of the Alliance there are 20 countries, that is, two thirds are both EU members, and they will be present in any case. ”

Separately, countries that are members of the EU, but not NATO, such as Finland, Sweden, Austria, will not be invited there. However, one representative from the European Union, of course, may be present there, and there are already precedents, reminds Arbatov: when the negotiations on the nuclear deal with Iran were underway, the seventh participant was an EU country that was not part of the main negotiating group (meaning Germany. – < strong> “MK” ).

“This form of participation is quite possible even now,” the expert admits. – In addition, the idea of ​​discussing security issues within the OSCE has already been voiced: of course, the EU will participate there. But then the formal representation of the European Union and NATO as such becomes meaningless: the OSCE agreements cover all the players involved, regardless of their bloc affiliation. ”

Concluding the topic of the talks scheduled for January 10 in Geneva, the expert reminds: both Russia and the United States will inform their allies, but they will prefer to lead the process themselves. European participation in this case is not expected, as, for example, China, which is, in principle, an interested party, especially in the conditions of alliance with the Russian Federation and confrontation with the United States.

The very fact of early negotiations between Russia and – in its many-sided incarnation – Western countries, it is rather a positive signal. At the same time, it seems that all parties understand that it is impossible to find breakthrough points conducive to de-escalation, let alone a compromise, in the short term.

Nevertheless, both politicians and political scientists note that there is an active dialogue between Russia and the West can become a deterrent (and, if lucky, a stimulating factor in a peaceful way) against the backdrop of the sagging activity of the same “Normandy format” in Ukraine. Kiev has repeatedly expressed its desire to continue full-fledged negotiations on the Donbass issue, but Moscow is skeptical about this idea, given the situation in the region and continues to exclude itself from the parties to the conflict. Given the dependence of the Ukrainian authorities on the American White House, it is quite possible that it is the bilateral negotiations between the Russian Federation and the United States that will move the Donbass issue off the ground.


Russia and the United States in January to hold talks on the situation in Ukraine

On January 10, Russia and the United States will hold talks on arms control and the situation in Ukraine.


On January 10, Russia and the United States will hold talks on arms control and the situation in Ukraine. This is reported by Agence France-Presse, referring to representatives of the White House.

“The United States of America and Russia will sit at the negotiating table on January 10th. It is planned to discuss issues related to arms control and the situation around Ukraine, “the newspaper notes.

Earlier it was reported that representatives of the United States and Poland discussed the situation on the border between Russia and Ukraine. They exchanged views on Russia's military build-up near the border with Ukraine and reaffirmed the importance of Allied unity in diplomatic and containment efforts.


The Ministry of Foreign Affairs called the possibility of the United States to turn the ruble into a “wooden” one as a fantasy

The head of the foreign ministry department called the possibility of the United States to restrict the conversion of the ruble fantastic. At the beginning of December, Bloomberg reported on negotiations on limiting the conversion of the Russian currency by Washington and Brussels. The agency linked possible sanctions with the escalation of the situation in eastern Ukraine

The ability of the United States to restrict the conversion of the ruble as a national currency, to make it “ wooden '' looks extremely unlikely. About this in an interview with RIA Novosti said Dmitry Birichevsky, Director of the Department of Economic Cooperation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

“ You can, of course, try to prohibit some individual financial market participants from certain transactions in the American jurisdiction or with American companies, which, in general, often happens. But in any way to limit the convertibility of the ruble as the Russian national currency & mdash; this is something from the category of fiction & raquo;, & mdash; said the diplomat.

Birichevsky also noted that these are “ extremely exotic measures '' that hardly took place in history. At the same time, according to him, it is difficult to imagine how this can be implemented.

In early December, Bloomberg reported that Washington and Brussels may impose sanctions against the largest Russian banks and RDIF in the event of aggression against Ukraine. As one of the most likely measures, the agency's sources named restrictions on the conversion of rubles into other currencies. CNN also wrote about possible sanctions against Russia, including with respect to its sovereign debt. In extreme cases, the country can be disconnected from the SWIFT interbank system, they indicated there.

Press Secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov said in response that such publications continue the line of “ information hysteria ''. “ Rather, this is not news, but a continuation of the information hysteria that we see in the media these days, '' & mdash; he said.

As the vice-president of the Association of Banks of Russia Alexei Voilukov clarified to RBC, possible restrictions may complicate the situation in Russia, but nothing prevents, for example, from buying currency from third countries, in particular from China. “ Yes, it can be more expensive, the conversion is more difficult, the path is longer. But in this case, citizens, as now, will be able to receive dollars in our banks, cash and non-cash, go out with them, pay, '', & mdash; he explained.

That Russia could 'invade'; to Ukraine early next year, wrote The Washington Post, Bild, Associated Press and other media. The Pentagon accused the Russian side of concentrating its armed forces near the border with Ukraine and called on Moscow to be “ more transparent '' in their intentions. Biden said the US is working with its European allies on a “ comprehensive '' a package of measures to prevent the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.

Moscow has repeatedly denied the accumulation of troops near the borders with Ukraine and the possible “ aggression. '' At the same time, the press secretary of the Russian president, Dmitry Peskov, pointed out that the movement of military equipment and army units across the country & mdash; it is exclusively Russia's internal affairs. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, in turn, promised that Moscow will respond to possible sanctions.

Subscribe to FB RBC Get news faster than anyone


In Kiev, they complained about the “cynical” betrayal of the United States in the gas issue

The expert said that the Americans simply want to occupy a third of the European gas market

Photo: pixabay. com

& nbsp; At the same time, the expert points out that the main interest of the Americans is to occupy a third of the European fuel market.

Granovsky emphasizes that American political technologists are working “cynically”. Uses & ldquo; the dirtiest technologies & rdquo ;. And now the European market has become an even more tasty morsel for the Americans. You can sell gas there for $ 1,500.

Russia plans to supply gas to Europe in the future through the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. The Americans are actively hindering the advancement of this project. They are interested in supplying their own gas to Europe. For this, there are terminals for receiving ships carrying liquefied gas.

The Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline consists of two threads. Their total capacity is 55 billion cubic meters per year. Construction was completed back in September. But now the launch has been postponed, since the German regulator has not made a decision on the certification of the operator. Germany is expected to consider this issue in mid-2022.


Experts have proposed to place the block “RosKVN” and “Iskander” near the United States

“And then the topic of threats to Ukraine from Russia will be closed”

Military experts and political scientists continue to discuss how Russia can respond to the collective West if its security proposals are ignored by the United States States and NATO. At the same time, a variety of options for a military response are proposed that can make Washington pay more attention to Russia's concerns.

Photo: Vitaly V. Kuzmin

The well-known political scientist Vladimir Kornilov, either jokingly or seriously, suggested creating a new military bloc in the Western Hemisphere. “I propose, in response to the creation of the AUKUS military bloc, to create a RosKVN bloc next year (Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua). To contain American aggression in the Caribbean. In my opinion, an adequate answer, – he wrote in his Tekegram channel. – At the same time, let's hear about the “impossibility of spheres of influence in the 20th century.”

Military expert captain 1st rank in reserve Vladimir Gundarov told MK that it is possible to do without the RosKVN bloc.

“What if we really, well, if not create RosKVN, but deploy missiles in these countries? Then the US and Europe will forget about Ukraine and will talk about the missile threat from RosKVN. I think this will be the next step to close the topic of the Russian threat to Ukraine and refusal to move NATO to the East, “Vladimir Gundarov said.

The military journalist, reserve colonel Viktor Baranets, adheres to the same point of view. On the air of the 60 Minutes talk show on December 24, he offered to deploy a pair of bombers in Cuba or Venezuela, as well as Iskander and Caliber missiles capable of shooting through the entire US territory.


Researchers in the United States have opened the time capsule found in the statue’s pedestal

American researchers in Richmond (Virginia) opened a time capsule found in the pedestal of a previously demolished equestrian statue of Confederate General Robert Lee, AP reports.

It is reported that the capsule was small a box made of lead. It contained three books, an envelope and a silver coin. This message to descendants lay sealed for over 130 years.

The content of the found books has not yet been specified, since they all got wet.

Earlier it was reported that Russian specialists are working on the creation of the capsule service time '', with the help of which Russians will be able to transmit digital information by inheritance.

It is specified that the service will allow storing digital data in a protected mode. & nbsp;

The development is carried out by a team from MEPhI, MGIMO and Lomonosov Moscow State University. & Nbsp;


NASA announced cross-flights between Russia and the United States in 2022

Cross Russian-American flights to the International Space Station will take place in the fall of 2022. This was announced by the head of the US ISS program, Joel Montalbano, RIA Novosti reports.

The corporation plans to send an astronaut from Russia on a Space X spacecraft, while an American astronaut will join the crew of the Soyuz spacecraft.

According to Montalbano, an intergovernmental agreement between the countries has already been concluded, NASA is awaiting its approval by the Russian authorities.

Meanwhile, the descent vehicle of the Soyuz MS-20 spacecraft; with Japanese space tourists Yusaku Maezawa and Yozo Hirana, as well as Russian cosmonaut Alexander Misurkin, successfully landed in Kazakhstan on December 20.


Media: the United States sent a team of cyber experts to Kiev

The US authorities have sent their cybersecurity experts to Ukraine to help Kiev defend the country from Russian threats. According to the New York Times, the United States has information that Russia is allegedly preparing large-scale cyberattacks against the energy system, banking organizations and government bodies of Ukraine.

“The goal of Russia is to show that Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky is inept and defenseless – and, possibly, provide a pretext for invading the country, “the newspaper writes.

NYT recalls that in 2015, hackers from Russia hacked into the Ukrainian energy system, seizing the control center of an electric utility company. Then they turned off one power plant after another, and the operators had no choice but to look helplessly at the monitors.

The White House explained to the publication that the United States has long been helping the Ukrainian authorities in strengthening cyber defense and increasing cyber resilience .


Will you be the third? In the United States failed the next test of a hypersonic missile

New tests of the American hypersonic missile AGM-183A under the ARRW (Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon) program ended in failure. According to an Air Force spokesman, the sequence of launch operations was interrupted prior to the separation of the rocket due to an unknown problem. figured out what happened this time with the weapons, tests of which literally pursue failures.

The specialized portal The War Zone reported about the failure with reference to a representative of the US Air Force. Rocket accelerator tests took place on Thursday, December 16. The test missile was to be launched from a B-52 strategic bomber. It was supposed to accelerate to a speed of five times the speed of sound. However, according to an Air Force spokesman, “the launch sequence was interrupted prior to [missile] separation due to an unknown problem.”

According to him, the rocket will be returned to the manufacturer for immediate analysis of telemetry and onboard data. The US military expects to resume flight testing as soon as possible. Experts have not yet figured out the reasons for what happened – they are studying telemetry and launch data. And, of course, the US military plans to resume flight testing as soon as possible.

The main purpose of the test was to demonstrate the ability of the rocket booster to work as intended. The Air Force hoped to conduct three successful tests of the launch vehicle this year before testing prototypes with real hypersonic gliding missiles loaded into them. But it didn't work out.

Previously, tests of the AGM-183A hypersonic cruise missile were conducted on July 28 over the Point Mugu Ridge off the coast of Southern California. They were attended by the 419th Flight Test Squadron from the US Air Force Edwards Air Force Base in California and the Global Power Bomber Joint Test Group. The rocket safely separated from the carrier aircraft & mdash; strategic bomber B-52H, & mdash; but the AGM-183A ramjet never started. In April of this year, the missile did not even leave the pylon of the B-52H strategic bomber. This can make the & nbsp; disappointment with the new hypersonic weapon.

However, the failure does not mean that the United States will not be able to create hypersonic weapons. Recall that Elon Musk faced a huge number of problems on the way to the conquest of outer space. For example, from 2013 to 2016, Musk tried to land SpaceX rockets on an offshore platform. It didn’t work out right away: hitting the water, engine sensor error, lack of hydraulic fluid, damage to the rocket leg. His Falcon 1 rockets exploded three times. The approach is quite simple – not many times to check and recalculate, but to test the entire product at once. And, ultimately, his ships carry people to the ISS. And perhaps they will be taken to Mars.

Problems during testing of the experimental strategic missile defense system “ A '' at the Soviet V-1000 anti-missile. On March 4, 1961, with its help, for the first time in the world, the warhead of an R-12 medium-range ballistic missile (8K63) was intercepted. And it was a triumph of domestic weapons and equipment. However, before that there were 11 unsuccessful launches.

Tests of hypersonic weapons & mdash; it is a marathon that Russia, China and the United States have embarked on. However, for the time being, there is no need to pay much attention to the facts who are somewhat ahead and who are a little behind. The important thing here is who will be the first to come to the finish line, that is, will take hypersonic weapons into service and launch their mass production.

AGM-183A ARRW (Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon) & mdash; promising hypersonic cruise missile with a ramjet engine and a guided warhead – & mdash; developed by Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control (a division of Lockheed Martin Corporation). Strategic bombers В-1В and В-52Н and multifunctional fighters of the 4th generation F-15EX are considered as carrier aircraft.

ARRW uses a rocket to accelerate all weapons to a given speed and altitude, after which the nose cone “ breaks '' and a hypersonic vehicle exits. It glides back towards its target at hypersonic speed. This device is not only fast, but also maneuverable.

Officially, the characteristics of the AGM-183A ARRW missile have not been disclosed. At the end of 2020, it was reported that the new hypersonic missile would fly at an average speed of 6.5 to 8 Mach numbers over a range of thousands of kilometers.


< p>


Satanovsky assessed the likely response of the United States to the proposals of the Russian Federation: “They will definitely send it.”

“It could end with anything”

The proposals for achieving strategic stability voiced by the Russian Foreign Ministry on December 17 will most likely not be accepted by the United States and NATO. The consequences will be unpredictable, right up to the war. This is the opinion of the well-known Russian political scientist Yevgeny Satanovsky.

The reaction of the US and NATO, he wrote on his Telegram channel“ Armageddon “is generally predictable:” something can be discussed, but generally unacceptable. ” Otherwise, according to him, the United States “will have to curtail all the work of strangling Russia by military means, leaving only agitation, propaganda, recruitment, espionage and, at worst, sabotage to achieve this goal …”.

“ They will certainly send us, – the political scientist believes. – Only Biden lacks after Afghanistan to retreat to the initial positions in Europe. The Republicans and the particular Trump will not forgive him and the Democrats for this. And the entire foreign policy of America, as you know, is nothing more than a reflection of domestic policy. ” won't do it at all. ”

“ A damn curious situation. It can end with anything, ”the expert noted.

At the same time, he believes, “it makes no sense for Biden to fight for Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic States and Georgia with Romania and the Czech Republic either.”

“It's one thing to bring them to Russia – he noted. – … Rhetoric and military exercises, assault and onslaught, NATO bases and strongholds, a little money and weapons and a lot of promises to increase self-esteem – it's understandable. But to fight seriously ?! And if the proposals made by Russia are not accepted, this means exactly this development of events … “.


Revealed the requirements of Russia to the United States and NATO on security guarantees

“Russia has been retreating too often, and now is the time to retreat to the West”

The Russian Foreign Ministry has published draft treaties between Russia and the United States and NATO on security guarantees. This was reported on Friday, December 17, in a document published by the Foreign Ministry. The political scientist told how to evaluate Moscow's proposal and what is their main meaning.

Photo: Gennady Cherkasov

“The proposal of the Russian Foreign Ministry cannot be called an“ olive branch ”for sure,” Alexey Makarkin, vice president of the Center for Political Technologies, professor at the Higher School of Economics, comments on MK. – Russia proceeds from the fact that for a long time it made unilateral concessions. Even earlier, the USSR agreed that there would be no more Warsaw Pact when the member states decided to abolish the organization and withdraw from the Soviet sphere of influence. In fact, the Soviet Union abandoned the “Brezhnev Doctrine”, which provided for the limited sovereignty of the Warsaw Pact countries.

This was followed by the expansion of NATO to the East in the 1990s, then the Baltic countries were admitted to the North Atlantic Alliance in the 2000s.

Now Russia proceeds from the fact that it has retreated too often, and now is the time for the West to retreat. Moscow is sending a rather tough signal to its partners. The fact is that most often such proposals are sent through diplomatic channels, or some informed sources report their details. And here they were immediately announced. This whole picture is reminiscent of the first years of Soviet power, when it was proclaimed that secret diplomacy was ending, and all proposals would be made openly and publicly, so that every worker or peasant could freely familiarize himself with them.

On the part of the Russian Federation, this is actually a rather demonstrative step. At the same time, with the full understanding that these proposals will not be accepted. Of course, we can talk about the possibility of some kind of agreement on exercises and on military activity in general, but in Russia, again, they proceed from the assumption that this is a comprehensive proposal. It cannot be discarded from it any elements that are more or less acceptable for partners, and discuss exclusively them.

At the same time, Russia makes it clear that this is not an ultimatum. And, as far as I understand, even if these proposals are not accepted, Moscow wants to at least begin to discuss them. This is probably an incentive to push the US and NATO into a serious discussion. And if it does not exist, then the dialogue will come to a complete impasse.

Therefore, now the main goal and desire of Moscow is to induce partners to enter into negotiations in various ways, starting with military activity and ending with such demonstrative documents. “/p>

In the introductory part of the treaty, Russia proposed to consolidate the principle of the impossibility of unleashing a nuclear war. In total, the draft document contains eight articles.

Moscow invites Washington to agree to act on the basis of the principles of indivisible and equal security and without prejudice to each other's security. To this end, she proposes to take mutual obligations not to take action and not to carry out measures affecting the security of the other side. Moreover, the parties should not use the territory of other states for the purpose of preparing or carrying out an armed attack on Russia or the United States.

Washington also needs to undertake obligations to exclude further NATO expansion to the East and to refuse to admit states that were previously members of the alliance. to the USSR. This requirement, in particular, applies to Ukraine and Georgia, which constantly declare their desire to join the alliance.

In addition, the United States undertakes not to create military bases on the territory of countries that were previously part of the USSR and are not members of NATO, as well as to use their infrastructure for any military activity, to develop bilateral military cooperation with them.

The Russian Federation proposes to mutually abandon the deployment of armed forces and weapons, including within the framework of international organizations, military alliances or coalitions, in areas where such deployment would be perceived by the other side as a threat to its national security, as well as refrain from flights of heavy bombers equipped for nuclear or non-nuclear weapons, and the presence of surface warships of all classes in areas outside the national airspace and outside national territorial waters, from where they can hit targets on the territory of Russia or the United States.

Russia recommended returning to the principle of non-deployment ground-based intermediate and shorter-range missiles outside the national territory. Moscow also considers it necessary to exclude the deployment of nuclear weapons outside the national territory.

The Russian Federation proposed to the North Atlantic Alliance to conclude an agreement in which it is proposed to return to the work of the Russia-NATO Council, restore communication channels and stop considering each other as adversaries. In nine articles of the document, Moscow also considers it necessary to record the non-deployment by Russia and the NATO countries of their armed forces and weapons on the territory of all other European states, in addition to the forces that were already in this territory as of May 27, 1997.

Exclude the deployment of ground-based intermediate and shorter-range missiles in areas from which they are capable of hitting targets on the territory of other participants. Exclude further expansion of NATO, including the accession of Ukraine, as well as other states.

In addition, the member states of the North Atlantic Alliance must abandon any military activity on the territory of Ukraine, as well as other states of Eastern Europe, Transcaucasia and Central Asia.

Let us remind you that the intention of the Russian Federation to receive security guarantees in November was announced by President Vladimir Putin at the Foreign Ministry collegium. The Russian leader instructed representatives of the Foreign Ministry to prepare relevant proposals. “It is necessary to raise the question of seeking to provide Russia with serious long-term guarantees of ensuring our security in this direction, because Russia cannot exist and constantly think about what may happen there tomorrow,” the head of state noted. >