"The Russian Federation is waiting for a breakdown": Rustamzade Has about the geopolitical consequences of war
The editor of the military heading Iigal Levin interviewed the Azerbaijani military analyst Agil Rustamzade to discuss the possible collapse of the Russian Federation, the threat from Iran, and the reform of the UN.
In the first part of a major interview with Agil Rustamzade, it was about the situation at the front and the course of hostilities, about the battle for Kiev, about how the aggressor uses drones-Kamikadze, about problems that Ukraine has in military plan-and about ways to solve them . The topical topic is Western weapons. The event countries agreed to pass tanks and have already started training.
Suddenly, it turned out that everything is, and the US would make the same "Abrams", and the Poles have "leopards". Why could this issue not be resolved in the spring or summer, why is time delayed? The event in its national interests is heterogeneous. There are three blocks of countries. I will outline the policy of each of them. The first is Anglo -Saxons (USA and Britain). They are set to complete the war and make the Russian Federation a state that will not threaten the civilized world.
Their national interests do not end at the exit of Ukraine to their borders in 1991. In the United States, only a small part of Trumpists opposes the transfer of any systems of Ukraine. But the fact is that we do not know the whole complex of the game and its nuances, so it will be wrong to judge how much the United States is involved or not involved in this war. They transfer weapons to the terms and volumes of the strategic concept at least for further denuclearization of the Russian Federation.
The second block is the countries of the old, "classic" Europe. They have no borders with the Russian Federation. In their understanding, the balance of forces in Europe was provided by Moscow. They have negotiated with her, business, they still see a trading partner in the Russian Federation . . . who drank and sorted, but it is necessary to negotiate with it. It is France, Germany and Italy.
The third block is countries that have borders from the Russian Federation and other states that look at Moscow through the prism of history and initial danger. These three blocks, although agreed, act together, but their contribution is heterogeneous. The interest of the Anglo -Saxons is clear - so that not only Ukraine won, but also weakened Russia. What is the interest then in France and Germany? In the end, their help is still great, despite the fact that they were boiled.
You know, this belongs to the theory of conspiracies, but there is such a thing as the old world order. Old World Security Architecture. It was tried to form after the Westphalian peace. Changes were made. In this coordinate system, Germany, the Russian Federation, Iran are countries that have conducted and maintained the balance of regional and continental security on the Eurasian continent. And Europe requires Russian Federation and Iran to balance forces in one form or another.
We see France's involvement in various events in Iran, but not to reduce defense or nuclear research - they want Iran to become a civilized state even with increased combat and defense capabilities. At the same time, all other states do not want Iran to be a strong state. Even the US states that Iran is a country that exports terrorism and instability. And not only in the Middle East, but also in the Caucasus. I think the future will always win.
There will be a new system of world security, world order, where France and Germany will take a place that corresponds to its military and political weight. In your opinion, will a new structure come instead of the UN, how did it replace the League of Nations at one time? Unambiguously. The UN lost all its tools, all the possibilities of influencing processes. I think that for the world security system, you need to reconfigure all the elements that would resolve disputes.
The Russian-Ukrainian War What happened? The old world did not cope with these challenges, could not guarantee safety in our region. Therefore, of course, it is necessary to reformat everything - and the UN, in particular. All political elites are already stated. If the UN is not reformed, then I think that new structures will be formed on the Eurasian continent, which will continue to deprive the UN of any political influence and authority.
The war is not over, and some commentators say it can go beyond Ukraine. How likely do you think it can happen? Under what conditions and what countries can they come into war with Russia? The event has fallen on the full, and Ukraine cannot lose. This is a very unlikely scenario. In the army of the Russian Federation, I do not see the resources that it could cause damage to the Ukrainian army.
And I think that not under the flag of NATO or any other Western country, but some number of servicemen (with or without combat equipment) could enter the territory of Ukraine. This is an opportunity. I do not see another likelihood with the task of strikes or the penetration of the Russian army in the territory of other Western powers. Because the Russian army has problems in Ukraine, why it still problems in other places.
How probable is the great war and large -scale fighting in the Middle East, for example, in Iran? The Western community has reason to believe that Iran can develop and use nuclear weapons. And the process has already begun: the United States, along with Israel, began to press on Iran. I think there will be an increase in missile and aviation strikes on military infrastructure and nuclear infrastructure of Iran.
Strokes on military bases that can use rocket weapons can begin even earlier than nuclear infrastructure. On the territory of Iran? In the territory of Iran and in Syria - Iran has the opportunity to attack Israel. Therefore, the coalition of Israel and the US begins to squeeze Iran from Syria. Much depends on Iran. If he goes to the escalation, he may not be fighting with him, but the infrastructure will go - to pick up the opportunity to make long -distance missile strokes.
The question of the expected collapse of Russia and its consequences. There are several scenarios, from federalization to uncontrolled chaos. How do you see it and how real it is? The variant of collapse is not denied, and it is strange that this option is denyed by people who lived in the USSR and survived its collapse. They do not believe that this can happen for the second time.
Well, I will say: Russia should be kept from the Syrian scenario, from uncontrolled chaos - to the removal of its nuclear arsenal. It is possible? Under the right conditions, when, say, Russia will go to surrender - yes, this is a possible option. You mean that they will offer new elites some "delicious buns" or guarantees? It is too early to talk about the tools. You were caught by surprise here, I did not analyze deeply, but let's say so - yes, you can act by concessions or negotiations.
Denuclearization of the Russian Federation from chaos will not save. Russia is a country with the world's largest nuclear arsenal. And the task is by no means to prevent the process of uncontrolled breakdown until the removal of the nuclear arsenal. The collapse of the USSR at one time was also considered unrealistic. It was said that there would be reformatting, but everything would remain under the communist flag. And in the West then were also afraid of problems with nuclear weapons.
Yes, the collapse of the Soviet Union was possible when the leadership of Kazakhstan, Belarus, Ukraine gave a guarantee that they did not need nuclear weapons. That is, control was established over nuclear potential. We understand that the Russian-Ukrainian war is one of the factors that can lead to the collapse of the Russian Federation.