DEBATEThe United States and Russia are not on the verge of a new Cold War

IntroductionAs soon as the definition of the Cold War is an intense economic, political,military, and ideological rivalry between nations, short of military conflict; sustained hostile political policies and an atmosphere of strain between opposed countries, it can be argued that there is not Cold War nowadays because this, in fact, is not a global military and ideological struggle. It is just a regional dispute.The nature of today's conflict is different. As Vasily Kashin ( an analyst with the Moscow-based Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies) said, "it's more like the conflict between the 19th-century great powers," a time of imperial struggle over British versus Russian supremacy in Central Asia. "It's more about the attempts of rising powers like China and Russia to resist the dominant influence of the United States".

1. At the heart of the Cold War there were fundamental ideological differences. On the one hand, there was the communist bloc, which stated that capitalism and the entire West would collapse. On the other hand, there was a response that communism - a terrible enemy, and that it should collapse. While the communism was alive, the Americans could not live peacefully.During the Cold War, there was some confrontation in the ideology of systems. Now situation is different. In the modern Russian society has the same type, as any other modern country, except maybe two or three exotic countries like North Korea or Somalia. All others have the same structure, all have a market economy, private property, democracy, elections. There is no a fundamental contradiction.

2. The concept of a "new Cold War" contains the wrong idea about Russia and the West, especially when it comes to the generation that grew up after the collapse of the Soviet Union.There are clear differences between this conflict and the Cold War: there is the lack of a global ideological measure, the prevalence of tension in the post-Soviet space, but not in other regions, as well as the growing role of non-Western countries (China, India, Brazil, etc.), which remain neutral.

3. The world has become a globally open. The current situation is different from the conflict that occurred in the world during the second half of the XX century, by a profound difference in the interpersonal relations of citizens of the conflicting countries.Despite the talks of a new Iron Curtain, mutual hostility and mistrust, which fell between the East and the West, Russian and Americans can in most cases travel to each other, communicate freely with each other and seek common ground on the most difficult issues through respectful dialogue.

Russian websites: http://actualcomment.ru/kholodnoy-voyny-net-i-ne-budet.html http://m.ria.ru/world/20150323/1054000282.html

4. The Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov Addressing the US has said that Russia "does not want and will not allow a new Cold War, we return to constructive cooperation on the basis of respect for mutual interests."

5. Russia to the United States: "We do not want a new Cold War"The effect of the sanctions and the collapse in oil prices pushed Moscow to try to recover, through the diplomatic channel, a dialogue with Washington, but asked also to America a little more effort in cooperation and a few steps back in terms of international politics.

Russia will never follow the path of self-isolation" - Despite "feel several statements of Western partners who need further isolate Russia, all these efforts will not lead to any result," said Lavrov. "President Obama has thought possible in his address to the nation on Tuesday about the same thing," he continued, adding that "Russia will never follow the path of self-isolation, the search of enemies and suspicion, as he said Putin ".

6. "Resolution Ukrainian is two-way" - To Lavrov "Russia will try to resolve the conflict Ukrainian preserving the territorial integrity of the country

7. The impatience of American imperialism - In his address the Foreign Minister does not hide a certain impatience with the attitude of the imperialist United States that is based on the conviction that "the number one, and that everyone else should recognize ". This attitude, according to Lavrov, produces problems without solving the real international nodes, for example in terms of security: "Our Western partners have to understand that security in today's world it is not possible through a unilateral approach," he explained.

8. Call it an infowar rather than a COLD WAR 2.0

the war of words between the two sides in the fight over control of Ukraine. It established by now that this is not a "defeat of the West" as the first report deplored after the annexation of the Crimea, but a political and diplomatic success of historic (Ukraine leaves the sphere of Russian influence to get into that EUR-American) it comes time to figure out how we can proceed from here on out, especially after what happened to the Air Malaysia MH17, which promises to become the Ustica Eurasia. The campaign of Russia Today.

Issuer Moscow is playing a infowar preventive aim of demonstrating that the incident is being used and manipulated to favor of the process of realignment of Kiev to the western capitals. Pepe Escobar added a new dimension to this comparison by saying that YouTube, Facebook and Twitter are the only sources of evidence put forward by the US, which would attribute to the armed separatists from Moscow responsibility for the incident. In practice: an offer by Russian pressure groups alarmed Germans of the affaire NSA-technological and economic interests determined to break the balance of the Digital US hegemony.

9. Battle of ideas

The same Escobar Asia Times clarified his thinking, drawing international economist Immanuel Wallerstein, father of economic globalism, according to which the "central power system", the US, cannot accept the break multipolar balance to hegemonic their favor. From this point of view it would be an MH17 desperate set up by Kiev to discredit Moscow finally, to break the stalemate on the ground and catalyze financial support and Western Economic. At this extreme view and strongly ideological contrasts that of Zigbniew Brzezinski, whose globalism is otherwise decidedly Atlantic and not multipolar, according to which Russia today has shifted too much toward China. Brzezinski, as well as incorporating Europe, therefore also caters to the "inner circle" of Putin evoking the fear of excessive subjection to Beijing in the wake of the energy agreements and financial (the New Development Bank). Regularity of the infowar therefore, both Washington and Moscow, are to turn to the ruling classes: the Germans, the Russian side, in order to emphasize the convenience to not align to a still smoky Atlanticism energy; groups Russian leaders themselves, on the American side, to incite to break solidarity with a leader who would lead them to isolation.

10. The axis-strategic missile

Jim Thomas, vice president of the think tank Center for strategic and Budgetary Assessment (Csba), in recent testimony before Congress, spoke of the need for a multilateral approach to the reduction of intermediate-range missiles (Treaty bilateral US-Soviet "INF"), also involving China. It is "flush out" Beijing from its status as a "free rider" of a process that has so far involved only Moscow and Washington. China, Iran and North Korea are clearly identified as the source of the main concerns of the US and allied missile. And Thomas goes to indicate a direct Russia-US agreement to reduce the limitations in the use of advanced bases only conventional missiles with range 500-2000 km, ie such as to prevent deployments Russians west of the Urals. The stakes are the regional missile shield that the United States could achieve: the one in the Persian Gulf along with other monarchies of the Gulf Cooperation Council and that focuses on South Korea-Japan. Significantly, neither side will damage Russian.

11. The West Pacific Moscow and Washington have interests in common

Even more explicitly, on National Interest, another expert Csba, Evan Montgomery has proposed a revision of the Treaty Inf to allow the deployment of advanced missiles in the Asian theater, maintaining the prohibition on the European market. An explicit offer also in Moscow, which in the case of a serious geopolitical upheaval as the annexation of Taiwan to China would be to converge with Washington to defend the strategic stability of the Western Pacific.

12. And business continues

These days the news of wealthy business that end between the two sides (Russian and American) Pacific, where for example the giant metallurgical magnate Alexei Mordashov's Severstal is in talks to surrender to the Americans and Ak Steel Dynamics Steel two plants in the Midwest , valued according to the Financial Times which is around $ 2.3 billion. And KBR, the US engineering group from the galaxy Halliburton, was awarded the renovation of an important segment of the refinery Gazprom of Omsk in Western Siberia (Hydrocarbon Engineering). In short, while the Eastern European elites in Europe (last example, the Lithuanian Artis Pabriks tough editorial in The New York Times) are riding the wave of anti-Russian, the reality of the "hard facts", the agreements and strategic interests in the long run between the two major powers on the horizon Eurasian. They could cut out the "Baltic Line", for the moment winning the infowar within Germany and an accomplice absent.

13. It is true that the root of the cold war - understood not as "a segment of history but [as] a permanent curvature of contemporary geopolitics" - is the first geopolitical than ideological. As stated in a frank and realistic the recent publishing of a magazine inspired , "for America is secure against the emergence of a rival power in Eurasia. It matters little whether Communist, Buddhist or vegan ".

14. The fact remains that, if Russia has a geopolitical vision, but it does not have an ideology in opposition to Western. Yet, as Aleksandr Dugin claims, "Russia, seen as a civilization, cannot, but must have their own values, different from those of other civilizations."

15. The need to refer to the guiding principles of their civilization is not just Russia, but all of the areas that comprise the Eurasian continent, and so all those forces that share a perspective of Eurasia sovereign. Gbor Vona has clearly expressed this need: "There is enough - says the Hungarian political - simply an alternative geographical and geopolitical, but we feel the need for spiritual Eurasianism. If we are not able to secure it, then our vision is only a different conception of political, economic, military or administrative, so able to represent a structural diversity, but not a pain in the qualitative level of the western face of globalization. There will be a political pole side but not a qualitative superiority. This can create the basis for a new Cold War or world in which you will face anti-traditional two forces, as happened in the case of the USSR and the USA, but it certainly will not counteract the historical process of the spreading of anti-traditionalism . For us it would be precisely the essential. From our point of view, it is inconceivable a clash in which globalization is opposed to another globalization ".

Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Consequences of the End of the Cold War for International Security, in The New Dimensions of International Security, Adelphi Papers, 265, 1991-1992, p. 3. Costanzo Preve, the fourth world war Barack Obama, 27 marzo 2014, pp. 20-21.

Vona Gbor, Nhny bevezet gondolat a szellemi eurzsianizmus megteremtshez, Magyar Hperin, I, 3, nov. 2013 genn. 2014, p. 294.