Russia and the USA: love, hate, love-hate, cooperation, or rivalry?
For those who cheer frenetically, often hysterically, this question doesn’t arise.
Some, with the fable of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” have allowed themselves to be blinded by the bipolar scheme (which they call multipolar) and support the so-called Global South without reservations, categorically refusing to acknowledge its immense ugliness, while pouring all the real or supposed atrocities onto the so-called West, seeing only these: worse still, they do not attribute them to a specific era and consider them insurmountable. It’s like saying that Frederick II of Prussia should have submitted to the then paradigmatic softness of the Prussians (indeed, before he intervened, the Prussians were all sauerkraut and mandolin). Or that Saint Francis would have had no choice but to share in ecclesiastical corruption or convert to Protestantism.
The axial position I defend is one that pivots on ourselves, that is, on Europe, not to suffer the dominant culture of today, but to revolutionize it, while simultaneously fighting – with all our might – for its physical, energy, and power survival.
This cannot lead us to look at other actors except from the basis of our own centrality.
Russia, by calculation or by choice, was aligned with Europe from 2001 to 2006, then gradually chose to replay the Yalta card and exploit the enormous capital that flowed into its coffers during the 2008 crisis. Since that date, it has pursued only an anti-European policy, first materializing in the destabilization and dismemberment of Ukraine, initiated at least since 2011, then in the occupation of strategic points to our south, with sensitive and substantial threats to our future, not as slaves. In other words, Russia is undermining our chances of regeneration and strategic and industrial autonomy everywhere, and it is doing so with great American joy.
Register silly giggles from those who, in the name of a binary brain, mock my thesis about the American war against Europe fought by a Russian infantry.
I have no idea how credible the Chinese, Indian, and Italian reports from January 2022 were, which spoke of an imminent invasion agreed upon by Putin and Biden, a thesis later echoed in Iran in the following April. Possible, but secondary.
What matters are not the “conspiracies” but the objective interests. To invoke Lenin, we can talk about the “unity and division of imperialism.” If we trace the history of Russia, at least since 1917, it is evident how much it owes to the United States: from the truce that allowed the Red Army not to lose the civil war, to the financing of its bankrupt economy, then moving on to Russian funding and armament during World War II, and continuing with Roosevelt’s concession of its spheres of influence intended to paralyze Europe.
The same goes for the creation of Israel and decolonization. A duo that the most astute defined as “Russo-American Imperialism.”
This didn’t mean they were allies, rather accomplices. Accomplice-rivals if you will, but capable of capitalizing on their rivalry to regiment their satellites.
The Russians, always inferior to the Americans in leadership, soft power, and resilience, have repeatedly tried to be cunning. However, the attempt to engulf Afghanistan was too risky. There, American aid ceased, and due to this and their lack of resilience, Soviet Russia imploded. It wasn’t attacked (unfortunately!) by the West, but it imploded. And its disintegration was also halted with American intervention, which began precisely with the nuclear disarmament of Ukraine.
When I speak of Russo-American complicity, I do not mean (and I have been very clear about this) that the two are explicitly allies. I mean that they pursue, or believe they are pursuing, the same anti-European interest.
The Americans do not arm only the Russians, as we will see later, but also the Ukrainians, and openly, because they need this Cold War-like tension.
A tension that, in a very short time, has curbed our ambitions and has economically and energetically propelled the USA, which is now perfecting its strategic advances everywhere, for which it can also thank the war in Ukraine, advances primarily in the Pacific, while its leading industries have gained a massive advantage (from two to ten years depending on the sector) in cutting-edge technology compared to China.
The invasion of Ukraine put an end to the planned European use of Donbass minerals (which now have been largely destined for Black Rock instead…) decided in July 2021. Russian expansionist ambitions were defined less than two months later! But the Russians were already active against us in Libya and Mali. Ukraine was the third stage of Russia’s war against Europe.
In the Sahel, it is uranium for European nuclear plants that is being blocked by the Russians.
However, the Russians supply their uranium to American nuclear power (at least 12% of the total in the USA).
One link among many:
https://scenarieconomici.it/a-maggio-gli-usa-comprano-una-quantita-reccord-di-uranio-arricchito-dalla-russia/
It is a mutual interest because the Americans participate in the Russian nuclear program:
https://it.insideover.com/energia/fiumi-di-miliardi-a-mosca-cosi-gli-usa-finanziano-il-nucleare-russo.html
Meanwhile, the 2023 UN report reveals that 72% of the components of Russian armament are American-made, and this figure can reach 86% if you add the U.S. allied producers.
Additionally, the chips in Russian tanks are American, and nearly all of the startup and operational programs for Russian missiles are of Californian production.
Lastly, the revelations about how the Americans have displaced Europeans in the Russian oil sector, with the expansion of the American giant SLB in Putin’s court: https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2024/08/16/financial-times-il-colosso-statunitense-slb-si-espande-e-investe-nel-settore-petrolifero-della-russia/7660319/
What does this mean?
That there are Russo-American co-interests at the expense of Europe.
That the American war against Europe is being fought by Russian infantry on the offensive, while those defending their own independence have official American recognition but not substantial and unconditional support, as there is always the excuse of the “red line” not to be crossed.
For the Americans, the ideal is a war of attrition with the creation of an Iron Curtain that envisions a division of Ukraine.
Will it end this way?
It is likely. However, the synthesis of interests also includes divergent interests, and in every sphere—whether Russian, American, or European—not all power centers are aligned.
Since the late 1950s, the CIA actively worked to bring the Italian Communist Party into government but was always repelled by the Embassy in Rome.
Regarding “unity and division” and complicated complicities, disorienting situations can always arise. However, these will still be absorbed by the dominant interest.
The critical moment is now.
The Ukrainian counteroffensive has brought the “nuclear problem” to the table, which is a great farce but could help force both parties to sit down for negotiations, given that the Russian army has stalled far more than anticipated and has shown enormous flaws.
The problem is that either the “averted” nuclear threat will occur in the next two and a half months, or it will be postponed until after January, because the American Administration cannot approach the presidential elections with an apparent defeat or with atomic risk.
If the Russians break through in these months, which is possible since they are trying in Donbass, American strategic plans will be succesful, but the Blinken Administration (as I call it) will face a dangerous image crisis that will make it appear to be losing too close to the elections.
The elephantine delay of the Russian offensive has ended up putting American planning in crisis, and Ukraine, which is evidently more European than Russia and demonstrates this with its flexibility and ingenuity in improvisations, is trying to take advantage of it.
If neither of the two options occurs, namely the “nuclear crisis” or a Russian breakthrough in the short term, Russo-American plans will have to be revised because it is unlikely that Moscow can sustain such a draining war throughout 2025 given the moral, strategic, and logistical deficiencies it has revealed.
If “peace” is not imposed by the end of October, Ukraine might even hope for a future that today seems unimaginable.
We shall see. We are likely entering the decisive quarter, not because the outcome of the war will necessarily occur within these ninety days, but because they could determine the final outcome of the conflict.
The texts in the links are all in Italian. If you wish to read them or at least understand them for a deeper insight into what has been mentioned in the article, copy and paste them into any online translation program.
