| Pañstwo i polityka » Stosunki miêdzynarodowe
ISIS, Daesh and connotations of bigger global politicsAutor tekstu: Adam Paw³owski
Arab Spring will be looked down upon by historians (and for sure it is right now) as a very meaningful event. At an eve of the second decade of 21st
century it showed how huge impact the internet era has had on our lives. When five years ago in Tunisia, just a few dozens of people called themselves to
protest in few cities (mainly in Tunis tough), it became the so called 'hype' and we all know how fast afterward everything went from there. But in the
birthplace of the Arab — so called — 'democratic revolution' in the Middle East it didn't take any deeper roots. Somewhat different road took the biggest
demonstrations in Cairo at The Tahrir Square. United States have this big problem that there are times and places in which they are and they are not at
ease — in the same time — with dictatorships around the world. The 'Abendland' ideas are not exactly compatible with the common approval of dictatorship.
But on the other hand, in most of cases they are more easily to be reason with. But the existence of authoritarian ruled countries around the world is just
a normal and obvious thing in contemporary world. Still, thefatherland of first, modern democratic republic in history doesn't feel best in the llimelight
at times when it makes a deal with such authoritarian-ruled states. Even more, not when those states are in the spotlight of such NGOs like Amnesty
International, Human Rights Watch and few dozen of others of this kind. Not when such states have history of humanitarian crimes and possible breakings
with UNs charter of human rights. But such states are needed because at certain times, exactly due to the monolithic type of governing they are more
prevalent in form of longevity, stability and sureness of what is going to happen at the highest echelons of such country. US needs alliances if they want
to keep their global position, or rather, global domination. We need actually, I would even use old cold war speech: 'free world' needs such global sheriff
like Samuel Huntington famously said in his Clash of Civilisations. Dictatorship isn't always bad, in the short run
at least, like Singapore showed us. Libya and its infamous Muammar Gaddafi was much more reasonable card to play and to look for than whatever-may-come out
of Libya now, at least for the next few years that opinion is generally going to hold up. Egypt has had some success. In the end it came without any
bigger, all-rampage raging civil war. The president in prison and the first democratic elections showed that unfortunately more than those who started this
on The Tahrir Square — modern, mostly liberal thinking groups of young students — Egypt broader civil groups are backing up Islam renewal bodies and even
previous government. Military coup d'etat took power making new, but old-like change. Like in Turkey, the military took the role of a pillar which has to
guard country from sliding into more religious zeal and zealous fervour. The Muslim Brotherhood mostly in jail, some of their cells are operating still on
the Sinai Peninsula and make some incursions in the Gaza Strip. Not only does Egypt have to stay in stability, it is
also vital — for many reasons — that it is also able to cooperate and be useful in matters of setting disputes between Israel and the Palestinian
Authority. It is vital in the fight with Hamas for Israel and for itself now (as Hamas is coordinating more and more of its missions with Muslim
The Islamic State, Islamic State of Syria and Levant, so-called Caliphate, Daesh ('to be trump upon' from Syrian-Arabic/Syriac. So that's why it is
derogative and I advise to use this term, as it is mockery and French Parliament is also backing up this idea), ISIL,
ISIS. It became reality and it just popped-up in the third year of the Syria domestic war like really lead by the hand of God… but is it? Not exactly. As
it seems to be it has been planned for some time now, by disgruntled late generals of Saddam Husain. Abu-Bakr Al-Baghdadi who not so long ago, in 2008 was
sitting in the US prison camp in an orange jumpsuit in Iraq and now he is a self-proclaimed 'caliph' — so the ruler of all the Muslims, as he wants to name
himself ‚the Prince of Believers'. He, with few dozens of Al-Qaida affiliated prisoners and aforementioned generals of Husain, organised underground
structures on the territories of Sunnis northern Iraq and Syria — which were: 1. ungoverned then, 2. in civil war in Syria, 3. disgruntled by their lack of
power (I mean Sunnis) generally in whole Iraq. So in 2009 when he just run out of prison, went into hiding and in not whole three years with many
terroristic cells were creating small pockets of his going-to-be army and finally atthe beginning of 2014 started his great and insane idea. He was greatly
funded by Sunni Saudi Arabia and probably Qatar too. Before they (Saudis and Qatar) found out about his exact plans of creating own state and claiming that
the Royal Family of Saudi Arabia has no legal rights to the crown — the same day, Saudi espionage — after gathering this information — contacted US and
said, they had made one terrible mistake and probably have crowdfunded someone too strong and too radical, even for the al-Qaida.
Let's go forward. Turkey, the most liberal and secular Muslim country on the planet. They have the biggest problem and in the same time the biggest
opportunity. Their have thousands of miles long border with IS. And they said they could use ground troops for dismantling ISIS, but they want also -
Bashar al-Assad — President of Syria to be gone, but US don't agree on that, because Russia and Iran are alliances of Syria and Bashar al-Assad and US -
first don't want their nuclear deal with Iran to go away and don't want to make more tense diplomacy with Russia during the crisis in Ukraine. They have
military on the border and — only if — ISIS attack on Turkey they are going to fight, not any earlier. The city of Kobane, the last town on Syria-Turkey
border in power of Kurds. The Kurds on the other hand — have had really tense relationship with Turkey. PKK (Partiya Karkerên Kurdistanê), Kurdistan
Working Party is still on the US and Turkey terrorist lists. Only month agothe leader of PKK made an appeal (currently he is sitting in Turkish jail) for
Turkey government and PKK to arrange peace talks. Appropriately 'عدو عدوي هو صديقي' ('Adu 'Aduyi Hooweh Ssadikki — My enemy's enemy is my friend — goes
Arabic saying). And US as well as Turkey are living according to it and not only do they hand in hand train Kurdish fighters of PKK now, but also arm them.
Turkey with more restrained (even with letting troops from authority of Kurds in Iraq, which have come to them pleading to cross their border to help
Syriac Kurds — it took them almost two weeks to give a green light to the Kurds.. After some 'positive reinforcement' from US for Turkey (it is still a
mystery what Turkey government got from Washignton DC friends for that, but position of US on 'Armenian Genocide'(at upcoming 100th anniversary) comes in
handy and only for good luck can we count Pope's resurfacing just weeks after this issue))) So it is not weird that Turkey was so reluctant to help the
Kurds even tough they were fighting IS, only when United States had made Turkey at least help the Kurds, they did so.
Of course we cannot immerse in the deeper understanding of proper context to this whole conflict without polarising on another issue. This time it will be
the not-exactly-concealed conflict between Shia (Alawites, few dozen others) and Sunnis (and few dozen others, Oman included).
Saudi Arabia and Iran, these two countries are always at odds with each other. After secularisation of Turkey and renouncing the title of rightful
caliphate, now the contest (from obvious political reasons not officially, both conflict and title) between them is always visible. Both countries treat
each other as biggest enemies and heretics. Only fifteen years ago, the highest official of Iran publicly claimed that holiest places of Islam are
currently in the hands of heathens. These countries' relationship seems to resemble the US-USSR polarisation. Even last conflicts in the Middle East (and
about that I will say more later) are fought between them at the territories of third player states. Hezbollah which is sponsored both with Alawite
government of Syria's Bashar al-Assad by Iran. Saudi Arabia which sponsors Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and the al-Qaida and some Taliban groups. Currently in
Yemen — almost out doorstep of Saudi Arabia. And Iran silent approval and probably sponsoring of Yemeni Huthis tribe. Why was the biggest tension in a
moment when few flagships of Iran Islamic Republic tried to just come near Aden? Why is all medical help from Iran to Yemen abolished (and it even the
method as Russia used in aid cargo of supplies is the same)? Why did for the third time UN just few days ago abrogate the session for voting over sending
UN troops to Yemen, after its President and Saudi Arabia pleaded for that (and again, this is in those times one of not-many things US, Russia and Iran and
China are agreeing together to, so voting session has no sense to even be called; Russia is pro Iran and week ago made another very profitable deal with
them for selling many of new and advanced weaponry to it before even partial calling off sanctions by UN, but US-lead, imposed on Iran in defence
structuralisation, buying and selling; China pro Russia on vote, US desperately is going to fight for new deal with Iran government and despite oil prices
falling off to just 45% value of January 2014 — oil is always useful, now even more when concerns are closing some refineries of 'shale oil' as it is more
advance and also expensive practise and are looking for savings and opening another — potentially third biggest 'crude oil' market like Teheran is going to
make Us concern more than happy and US government will see again plunging of oil prices to its lowest point of March/early April 2015 — and with them
Russian investment rates and make Kremlin once again cuts interest rates with fatal for its banks downside; classical case of political 'win-win') .
Currently in the US lead coalition against IS — Australia, Canada, UK, France and Saudi Arabia — are the most important partners. Australia and Canada as
parts of Commonwealth are adjusting their policy and are showing their commitment to US/UK alliance, or rather very important economically-political ties.
Austies have also another business in it, because of their hard trumping on terrorists policy lead by Tony Abbot — their current premier, who seems to gain
many percent in voting mainly due to its anti-Asian, anti-Islam policies. Mostly anti-immigrants. Tough Australia is redesigning its economical ties and
more and more taking part in local trade routes and organisations of Pacific trade, its policy of cultural ties is contradicting Samuel Huntington theory
of Australia swaying culturally into hands of Asian majority in South, Far-Eastern part of world. This kind of policy stance of Tony Abbot has many
oppositionists in new immigrants families, his don't-help strategy on Pacific(concerning boats of immigrants) pointed against unwanted immigrants on
Pacific, has lead also to many acts of violence and racism in Australia Eastern Coast. People are outspoken more and more against 'Asianisation' of their
country. Australia has also made the biggest offer to US, that in case of need for ground troops — even 600 of National Guard of Australia and Special
Troops can be redisposed in northern Iraq. But Obama policy of avoidance of new passive war/occupation of Middle East is easy to understand, if we look at
the fact, that one of most important reasons why he has been chosen in first place was his promise to get ordinary-regular troops out of Iraq. So now
Australia is involved in war only in so-called 'Operation Okra' and made around 300 strikes against IS, but only in Iraq. Some more after attack on café
Lindt in Sydney former year and two others cut off just before by Australia reinforced National Guard. Next coalition member — France. With France we deal
with similar situation. Currently only jets and air force France is taking part in coalition. But what is more in Operation Chammal takes part also few
France's aircraft carriers and they have its Rafale Fighters — so France made jets — stationed in another partner of coalition United Arab Emirates. UAE is
even more interesting state, due to its very good connections with European Union. Tough this country has really bad record of human right violations and
like in Qatar foreign workers are dying in dozens during building projects scheduled by government, mostly Hindi workers and what is even more terrifying
its law, in which sharia law is not only included, but has also oversight over civil and criminal law. That's why foreigners are being also killed few
times a year for crimes like alcohol drinking and thus the biggest opposition in EU was created after stoning few Asian home maids and for holding up
France citizen — woman for some conflict with dress code. But still, it is one of easiest to reason with countries in Middle East, aside Saudi Arabia,
which is 'wahhabi', so also radical. But many connections with business hub like UAE and stationing for bases and war ships is too great enhancement and
encouragement for EU to be just thrown away. The best example of it is five days ago made deal with UAE and Schengen countries for letting 90 days long in
every half of a year trips to EU and UAE for its citizens legal without passport. Saudi Arabia on the other hand is
the most important ally for the sake of domination in Arabs countries. Its budget worth of 750bn$ is greatest in a region, tough even Spain is double of
that, its commitment to keep Royal house need spending on army equivalent of almost 10% of their budget! Ergo 80.2bn of American dollars, even more when
its operation 'Restoring Hope' in Yemen began. 2009 and 2015 operations 'Scorched Earth' and 'Decisive Storm' made huge impression on countries around and
brought enraged outcry from Iran. Publicly held believe, or notion, that again US is behind third of those operations, is wrong in all kinds of way. US
military espionage for Saudi Arabia and its silent approval for bombing outskirts of Yemen and Huthi strongholds — is rather a price and repayment of debt
by US for Saudi Arabia spearheading Arabs coalition against IS and giving green light and encouragement to Jordan during operation 'Inherent Resolve'. But
still US wants to curb everything and cannot let this disastrous war-on-exhaustion in Yemen go on for long. Not if they don't want to starker rulings on
policy against US by Iran, which is all time long encouraged by Russia to do so. And Saudi Arabia is risking a lot during this proxy war with Iran. Because
this is neighbourhood and Saudi influence area — losing such war would be dangerous for ruling dynasty. US are not so fond of it either, tough they can
made some envisioned by them long time ago — assassinations of leadership of AQAP, like the last hunt on its greatest
leader — mission against Nasr Ibn Ali al-Ansi — ended with success. Saudi Arabia which is curbing any movements against dynasty, with great country
espionage and Special Forces also gains on such changes. It does not contradict what I stated earlier about sponsoring of al-Qaida by Saudi Arabia — but
offshoot of it in Arabian Peninsula was dangerous to also Saudi Arabia dynasty. More it is investing in other ramus — like al-Nusra fronts not so long ago,
when it became target of Inherent Resolve too(and at once made Saudi Arabia to back off, of charges accusing of sponsorship). United Kingdom and its
Operation Shader have like Canada — merely two and half months ago gave green light to aiming targets in Syria too.
Populations and religious minorities inside of Syria and Iraq are split. IS exist also mostly on territory of Sunni areas. And because Syria and Iraq Sunni
tribes were dissatisfactioned earlier with policy of their governments then IS is getting their attention and that is why still and still ISIS is growing
in numbers, not only foreign fighters, but also disappointed normal poor people who are easy to coerce, or to gather with use or fear, or money gained from
looting, ransoms and oil illegal mining and selling.
Iran. And here we have just few weeks ago won first big town battle by Iraq Security Forces and unfortunately Shia militia funded by Iran and made up again
by only Shia, on the territory of Sunni majority. And even what is more tragic, they were looting and killing civilians also, after winning at Tikrit. They
were pulled out at once by Iraq, but the damage has been done and it is only going to show Sunni's that they are going to again be treated unfair by Iraq
government and they can even because of that stand up for ISIS against Iraq, which is completely counterproductive.
Israel tough the most important player in Middle East — both taking into account military prowess and economic ties and capabilities. Its newest and most
military able tanks Merkava and all of tonnes of military stuff its own production and import from States, Japan and Germany with combination of regular
stationing and military exercises and amazing potential in fight-able recruits and regular, lineal army — gives it the most important position. Even able
to winning and stabilising whole region of northern Syria. Of course with great damages to itself, but nonetheless capable. And in the same time -
unimaginable from political reasons. Just mere thought of getting Israel into this mess, is for US secretaries biggest headache. So that is why till
full-fledged attack on Israel soil will not cause it to act in current situation. NATO Aliant Turkey and Israel cooperation, too are unimaginable. The
situation has to be dealt with hands of Arabs for Arabs, but for Turkey there is certainly role to play in it too. Israel on the other hand is now really
occupied with its own unstable policy, mostly internal one. Right and Ultra-Right political bodies are in power 61 to 59 votes in Knesset.  And Herzog opposition is going to fight tooth and nails to made Netanyahu aware of his minute majority. Despite of
that Netanyahu official opposition to Arab-Israelis and obvious disapproval of two-state-solution will lead to more Hamas and Hezbollah attacks, even not
so soon from now(as building of Jewish settlements thanks to Jewish Home/ HaBayit HaYehudi Party in number of almost
1600 new ones — is announced in Eastern Jerusalem — first time since 2010 in such number, and planned are few hundreds if not thousands more; if it was
miracle that Palestinian Authority didn't fired back for abrogating their payment from Israelis during Gaza Strip last war, then here I would rather not
hope for new miracles).
Iraqi Security Forces are constantly trained under watchful eye of US, UK, France, Turkey and Australia and few German trainers in military exercises.
After pumping huge money into development of Iraq and its army and dozen or so scandals with bribing and paying for line troops which 'soldiers' even once
hadn't set their foot in military training camps — US took matters in hands of 'advisers' and special troops, to this time make officers capable of leading
constant warfare. And if then Iraqi army wasn't ready, now few thousands of them are really good armed and skilled in combat. Worse is that Iran is using
its Shia connections to make its own 'proxy' state out of Iraq and pumps also huge money into Iraqi Shia Militia. Even few generals are officially leading
it. But when Iraq needs jets support then it sends militia away — and even more, Iraq government see where Iran's 'help' is leading too. Also Shia Militia
is radicalising Iraqi Forces and there were observed few 'green on blue' kind of attacks and hunts on some pro-American officials in army by militia
troops. For now government of Iraq, curbed on militia and it is not anymore so dangerous, but still Iraq has to use it wisely as those troops are prone to
burning American flags with the same desire as ISIS ones.
Almost six thousands of Iraqi troops are currently at training, and earlier trained fifteen thousands of Iraqi Security Forces are on disposal of new
Sunni-Shia government(which still has problems to really be united and equal for Sunnis, as only 10 to 15% are Sunni representatives, so tribes aside of
Anbar province are rather sticking with 'devil who they know' — ISIS — than Iraqi's new government). This is game-changer, because in new operation militia
will became obsolete, or almost obsolete and definitively diminished. That will again curb on Iran's ability to involve itself in building its 'backbone'
role for Iraq. Tikrit is taken, Anbar in half too, Kurdish forces are making bigger and farther going incursions into northern Iraq and Mosul Dam(taken by
Kurds few months ago), Baji Refinery and Mosul City outskirts. Two days ago, ISIS made last charge to take Baji
Refinery back, but it seems Kurds have another time the upper hand and it will stay by their forces to the end and will turn to gaining Mosul alongside of
Iraqi Security Forces, that is also another reason why militia will be unnecessary and could be dangerous for Kurds to. Another weird thing is that now
Iraqi government is more and more scared of Kurds Authority gaining more bulge and speed, it may seem like Peshmerga forces may later be very hard tissue
to dispose of for Iraqis after outing IS. Even bigger question mark is there when it comes to 'why after second plea of Iraqis to US, for make Kurds
officially renew their pledge to Iraq Republic is still left without any heed'? Does it mean that US is really starting to became fond of idea of making
Kurdistan? Independent country? With silent nod of Turkey wanted to get Kurds little bit farther of their territory and end PKK terrorists cells and
sometimes and occurrence of conflagrating wars against it? That might be as well to far flung idea. But still twenty thousands of combat ready, modern
armed Iraqis and few thousands of battle-harden, seasoned veterans from Peschmerga forces is any day now probably going to make try to get Mosul back. But
in such big, million-people city it will going to be hard, prolonged battle and one which still might-be lost on first try. City warfare is much harder
with insurgencies, and without any bridgehead/lodgement in city — that mission might decide about win or losing grounds in Iraq again — for both sides -
Iraqis and IS.
Syria government is constantly losing its ground and is almost unable to get its own voting and religious stronghold in south-eastern Syria — safe. Not
even with Iran help, because it cannot be too huge now, not only because of growing costs of such operations, but also from public policy reasons. Russia
is also doing less and less for sidewayed al-Assad regime. It just loses credibility. Bashar few weeks ago killed one of his trusted governors and week ago his own family member — according to some it might have been connected with growing dissatisfaction movements in his own regime. ISIS is losing
ground in northern Iraq, but case for Syria looks exactly the other way around. They are starting to have greater and greater wins. Syria revolutionist
rather just hold ground in north-western Syria Aleppo region, but Assad loses his hold and grip over West and Middle-West to ISIS at speeding up rate. Few
weeks ago situation was the most dramatic when IS was not so far away from camp for Palestinian and Syria's fugitives — which lays just outside of
outskirts of Damascus. Now situation is also far from good for Syria regime, is desperately trying to gain new alliances — lastly with Hezbollah even. But
Saudi Arabia(which just three days ago was also thinking about 'leasing' two thousands of Senegal troops for its proxy war with Yemeni Huthis) and Turkey
are both tightening its common policy and pressure on US in hope of making it to restrain from any kind of 'warming up' relations with Syria regime(even
tough more than few politicians in US wants such change) and strengthen their commitment to tackle and get this matter to the end till Assad will land in
scrap heap of history.
But how rest of this will look like in few months? I have made in my text few predictions, but like always in Middle East — everything can change in just
tiniest nick of time, but we might be sure, that everyone is just waiting to take advantage of this probable change. تجري الرياح بما لا تشتهي السفن إذا
نُصِرَ الرأي بطل الهوى إذا هَبَّتْ رياحك فاغتنمها('Winds blow counter to what the ship wants, but wait till it change and ride it.'). And what this change
might be and what it can bring with itself? We are to see.
Rise of ISIS A Threat We Can't Ignore, Jay Sekulow, Jordan Sekulow, Robert W Ash and David French, 2014.
ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror, Michel Weiss, Hassan Hassan, 2015.
Clash of Civiliastions, Samuel P. Huntington, 1996.
As it happens he was few times more right, than not in contemporary world overview. Look — Ukraine. It is really worrying how much he could have been
More on Russia situation(around a month ago) in this and another conflict — in my other text below:
Ukraine-Krise: Russlands ‚Cargo 200' hat die grenze überschritten — OSZE und die Rohölnotierung
Mehr darüber schreibe ich in einem Artikel ´Warum gibt es Demokratie in die USA und Gelenkte Demokratie in Russland?´ auf der Seite Racjonalista.pl .
Das Beste, was Russland jetzt machen kann, ist ihre Strategie nicht ändern — das heißt das Nächstliegende abstreiten. Das ist das Äußerste für
Russlands Politik. Heutzutage, wenn Russlands Verfassung so geschrieben ist, dass die Regierung jeden auf den Bürgern oder des Staatsgebiet
untergenommenen Angriff mit dem Atomsprengkopf abwehren kann, scheint die Wahl selbstverständlich zu sein. Sofern wir mehrere Tausende
Quadratkilometern der Landwirtschaft und die Fähigkeit das Leben durch den Krieg und unter Einsatz von Nuklearabfall zu behalten nicht ausschließen
wollen, sollen wir keine offizielle Schritte unternehmen. Deshalb wird auch Russland kein Nachbarland den Krieg erklären und es wird nie ein Land
geben, das die Atomkraft gegen Russland benutzen wird (besonders wenn wir unser Habitat, das heißt die Erde, wachhalten wollen). Als albert Einstein
gesagt hat: ´Ich bin nicht sicher, mit welchen Waffen der dritte Weltkrieg ausgetragen wird, aber im vierten Weltkrieg werden sie mit Stöcken und
Deshalb wird Russland so genannten Föderativer Staat Neurussland (der nie existiert hat und existiert auch nicht heutzutage) inkorporieren um die Krim
zu behalten. Obwohl es Neurussland auf der Landkarte nicht gibt, sind Donezk und Luhansk nur zwei Republiken, die gegründet werden um Geländestreifen
(und zwar nicht nur die Krim aber auch alle Gebiete bis zum Moldova) zu verbinden. Das ist nicht meine eigene Theorie, sondern eine von Prof. Kazimierz
Woycicki, der Expert auf dem Gebiet Deutschalnd beim Diplomatischen Europasektor diplomatischer Beratungsstelle in Deutschalnd, Polen und Baltischen
Staaten (er arbeitet mit Außenministerien in jedem von den oben erwähnten Ländern und beratet Regionalparlament währen Europäisches
Parlamentsitzungen). Deshalb wird die Ukraine keinen offiziellen Krieg erklären und auch deshalb wird Russland ein Drittel von heutiger Ukraine
inkorporieren und zwar ganz legal durch die Passivität von anderen Ländern, so Woycicki. Ehrlich gesagt wird es nicht der erste Fall im Laufe der
Geschichte...besonders der Geschichte nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg im letzten Jahrhundert. Die Inkorporation wird irgendwann sehr langsam passieren,
höchstwahrscheinlich während nächsten 10-15 Jahren.
Zurückkommend auf den Artikel, da Hunderte Körper von den Separatisten nach Russland geliefert werden und dies in nicht gekennzeichneten Fahrzeugen,
haben wir Beweise eines zynischen Spiels, das Putin mit NATO spielt. Das hat sogar einen offiziellen Deckname — ´Cargo 200´, was bezeiht sich auf den
Transport von toten russischen Soldaten zurück nach Russland. Aber um den Klassiker zu zitieren: ´Beweise gewinnen keine Kriege. Sag den Menschen
dieselbe Sache hundertmal und sie beginnen dich zu hören. Sag es ihnen tausendmal und sie werden dir glauben´. Eigentlich haben wir viel mehr Beweise,
mehr als wir brauchen, weil obwohl Russland zugibt, dass nur Freiwilliger an den Krieg zwischen Separatisten und der ukrainischen Regierung teilnehmen,
leugnet Russland immer noch die Teilnahme ihrer regulären Kräften. diskutieren wir aber mal wieso könnten die Rebellen in ein paar Monaten fast 90
neuen t-34 Kampfpanzern bekommen? Sollen wir zugeben, dass diese Kampfpanzer von der Ukraine auf Lager nicht besitzt werden? Russland sagt, dass die
Separatisten die Kampfpanzern der Ukraine gestohlen haben müssen (aber, wie schon gesagt, es kann nicht wahr sein), oder Polen, Litauen, Lettland oder
Estland. Kein von diesen Ländern besitzt t-72pp Panzern, die nur in Russland hergestellt werden und die einzige Länder, die sie besitzen, sind Russland
und Indien...also die Separatisten mussten zwei drittel der Welt wandern um sie von der Hindu Armee zu stehlen und dann in der Ukraine zuräckkommen um
mit diesen t-72pp Panzern zu kämpfen. Und gleichzeitig mehrere Dutzend Ländern haben nicht bemerkt, dass 90 Panzern durch die Ländern fahren? Ja,
klar...Aber wenn in Nordkorea es eine Überzeugung gibt, dass Kim Jong-un ein lebendiger Gott ist und er soll durch Gebete verehrt werden damit alles
gemacht werden kann...
Zurückkommend zum Hauptthema, muss ich noch eine andere Möglichkeit zugeben. Russische Offizielle, die im russischen Duma für Wirtschaft verantwortlich
sein, haben eine Sache nicht vorgesehen, und zwar den Rohölpreissturz. Putin hat sich schon lange nicht nur darauf aber auch auf Wirtschafts- und
Handelssanktionen von dem Abendland vorbereitet. Russlandsnationalbank hat ´ein sicheres Paket´ mit dem Wert von 400 Billionen Dollars. Dadurch ist
Putin bereit 2 Jahre Wirtschaftssanktionen auszuhalten und mit manchen Richtungswechseln in der Politik kann er sogar 4 oder 5 Jahre Sanktionen
auszuhalten. Aber mit der Scheieferölindustrie in die USA, der Rohölpreissturz ist der grüßte in der Dekade. Die Vereinigten Staaten waren nach China
der grüßte Erdülexporteur bis zum 2009, aber seit einigen Jahren haben ihren Import gezügelt und den Export aufgebaut. In diesem Sinne und die
Tatsache, dass die arabischen Länder und die OPEC-Länder (OPEC — die Organisation erdölexportierender Länder) inhren Export nicht zügeln, die Lage, in
der die Erdölpreise so iedrig sind, ist nichts Unerwartetes.
Jedoch hat Putinein verdoppeltes Problem. Die Rubelpreis sinkt wegen Wirtschaftsbeschränkungen und Exportverkleinerung. Die Situation war einmal sogar
so schlecht, dass Putin die Kreditraten von 10,5% bis zum 17% anheben musste. Das ist ein großer Schlag für die Russen, ist aber auch nötig um Rubel
vom Sinken zu halten. Im Moment brechen ausländische Unternehmen ihren Beziehungen mit Wirtschaft in Russland, weil sie unerfüllbar ist. Russlands
Budget bekommt fast 40% ihres Erträge von Rohölmaterialienexport und mit so niedrigem Rohölpreis für ein Barrel fällt Russlands Wirtschaft in einer
starken Senkung. Und wenn wir dazu geben, dass die Mehrheit der Menschen in Russland entweder sehr reich oder ziemlich arm ist und es in Russland
eigentlich keinen Mittelstand gibt, es fängt an eine gefährliche Situation zu sein. Manche von den reichsten Menschen in Russland sind aus dem Land in
November 2014 geflohen und sie haben mit ihnen fast 100 Billionen Dollars mitgenommen. Putin befindet sich jetzt in kritischer Situation und deshalb
versucht er die Preisen der meistgebrauchten Nahrungsmittel auf demselben Niveau zu halten. Er hat isch versichert, dass die Preise von Brot und Wodka
stabil bleiben. Er hat sich auch versichert, dass kein Unternehmen im Fremdwährung wie zB Dollar verdient. Diese unternehmer, die das nicht beachten,
verlieren ihre Arbeitsplätze oder können sogar zu einer Gefängnisstraffe verurteilt werden. Es beginnt immer mehr offensichtlich zu sein, dass im
Moment Putin alles auf eine Karte gesetzt hat und versucht zu lachen und stellt sich, dass alles in Ordnung ist. Jetzt ist alles in den Bürgenhänden.
Sollten sie immer noch Putin vertrauen und die Wirtschaftskrise überstehen, dann kann Putins Politik gewinnen. Sollten sie aber etwas Anderes machen
wollen...dann mal sehen, was daraus wird.
Al-Qaida in Arabian Peninsula.
« Stosunki miêdzynarodowe (Publikacja: 29-05-2015 )
Wszelkie prawa zastrze¿one. Prawa autorskie tego tekstu nale¿± do autora i/lub serwisu Racjonalista.pl.
¯adna czê¶æ tego tekstu nie mo¿e byæ przedrukowywana, reprodukowana ani wykorzystywana w jakiejkolwiek formie,
bez zgody w³a¶ciciela praw autorskich. Wszelkie naruszenia praw autorskich podlegaj± sankcjom przewidzianym w
kodeksie karnym i ustawie o prawie autorskim i prawach pokrewnych.