NATO Attack Incites Russia; J.R. Nyquist; March 25, 1999

[kabud]

NATO Attack Incites Russia; J.R. Nyquist; March 25, 1999

http://web.archive.org/web/20000118131101/www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=1999/3/25/72012

NATO strikes over Kosovo could spark a larger conflagration. Already,
a Russian TASS press report has hinted that the military action
against the Serbs could trigger the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

For the first time in its fifty-year history, NATO has attacked a
sovereign country. Deputy US Ambassador Peter Burleigh, defending the
NATO action before the UN Security Council, says the air strikes were
a necessary response "to Belgrade's brutal persecution of Kosovar
Albanians."

However humanitarian the intention, grave international consequences
may result from the air strikes. Russia's leaders are rapidly moving
to exploit a perceived outrage against their Serbian brothers.

Outrage over perceived American-British "imperialism" and aggression
so close to Russia's own border, may be a convenient tool to mobilize
Russia's latent conventional military power. It might also be used to
raise the morale of dispirited soldiers and workers by focussing
national anger against outside enemies. In this way the Kremlin, under
fire for its own failed economic policies, can rapidly unify the
Russian nation and other Slavic peoples behind a new banner.

DANGEROUS FORCES AT WORK

Whether the West acknowledges it or not, Russia has suffered a real
insult by American diplomatic and military moves.

Not only was Russian Prime Minister Primakov compelled to abandon his
all-important trip to Washington mid-flight, but Russian diplomacy was
set aside, ignored -- even spurned.

Last year Russian political and military leaders cautioned NATO
against air strikes in Serbia, suggesting that a "widened war" in
Europe might result. These same warnings were repeated in recent
weeks; but the Clinton Administration was contemptuous, and contempt
-- especially in politics and war -- leaves a lasting negative
impression on those who experience it. Dmitry Simes, president of the
Nixon Center for Peace and Justice, says: "The US administration
really treated Russia with a kind of contempt on this whole issue of
Kosovo."

Simes thinks it is a mistake to assume that Russia cannot do anything
about NATO air strikes.

In certain respects Russia is better prepared for war than America.
The principal area of neglect has been Russia's ground forces. The
present danger, in this context, is that Moscow might use the bombing
of Serbia to justify a calculated resurgence of the Russian Army.

Kremlin officials have already stated that their armed forces will be
placed on higher alert, that their military capability will be
improved.

"If war unfolds in the Balkans," says one Russian Defense official,
"the Defense Ministry will undertake a series of measures to increase
military readiness."

TRIGGER FOR A GLOBAL WAR?

Outside the Russian Federation, in the former Soviet republics of
Belarus and Ukraine, old paranoid attitudes are resurfacing. Belarus
President Alexander Lukashenko denounced NATO's air strikes, declaring
his intention to coordinate his nation's response with Moscow's.

According to TASS, Lukashenko might allow deployment of Russian
tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus, which forms a strategic highway
into NATO.

At the same time, the Ukrainian parliament also denounced the air
strikes in an overwhelming 231-46 vote. Some legislators suggested
that Ukraine should consider rebuilding its nuclear arsenal.

But the most sinister voices were those of the Russian leaders.

Playing the crisis for all that it was worth, President Boris Yeltsin,
at work in the Kremlin for the first time in weeks, referred to
Russia's "deep shock" at NATO's "naked aggression."

Yeltsin recalled Russia's military envoy to NATO. He pulled Russia out
of NATO's Partnership for Peace. He spoke of Russia taking "adequate
measures, including of a military character, to ensure ... general
European security." Yeltsin declared: "... this is a war in Europe,
and perhaps even more."

The moment was not lost on Vice-Admiral Vyacheslav Popov, commander of
Russia's powerful Northern Fleet. In response to the NATO air strikes
he told Itar-Tass: "[t]he Northern Fleet is ready to carry out any
order issued by the Supreme Command to defend Russia's interests."

Any order? Any order, whatsoever?

Russia's Communist Party boss, Gennady Zyuganov told Reuters: "This is
the darkest day of the post-war period. The United States is taking
the same route as fascist Germany."

RUSSIA GIVES UP THE MONEY

Before NATO bombed Yugoslavia, Russian Prime Minister Primakov was on
his way to America to ask for $15 billion in financial assistance.

When he learned that NATO air strikes were imminent, he turned his
plane around and went back to Russia, empty handed.

No doubt, the Russians are a proud people. Vremya, a Russian daily,
said of Primakov's turn-around en route to America: "Yevgeny Primakov
returned to Russia without money but with authority."

The decision by NATO to attack a sovereign nation, however well
supported by humanitarian considerations, did not take into account
Russian national sentiment and military potential.

In America and the West we have become one-sided in our thinking.
Everything, for us, boils down to money. We imagine that Russia's
financial weakness equals political and military weakness. But history
often tells a different story. The wealthy nations do not always
triumph. The riches of Athens did not prevail over Sparta. The
commercial prowess of Carthage did not defeat Rome. And the wealth of
Rome did not stop the barbarians.

Much has been written about the collapse of Russia's military. Yet few
consider that since Reagan's military buildup the US has gone from 27
Army divisions to 10, from 37 Air Force wings to 13, and from 541 Navy
ships to 339.

Before America unleashes more bombs, the U.S. ought to carefully weigh
the negative forces in Russia that are renewed and empowered.