The ‘Big 2’ of Foreign Policy

Not all western media outlets are ready, mouth agape, to unquestioningly believe everything American policymakers say and do. What’s next? What “games” could they be playing? Foreign journalists often ask themselves such similar questions, and they arrive at extremely disappointing conclusions, especially for the Washington political elite.

Right away, several publications actually placed the U.S. in the “big two” of foreign policy. American experts continue to present a wide range of reports, and the main objective, in fact, continues to be crafting ghost stories about “bloodthirsty Russia.” But in Washington, they obviously don’t realize that they didn’t simply repeat themselves. Based on their foreign policy “sighing and groaning” with regard to Moscow, the lion’s share of the Western audience is tired. But the incompetence and shortsightedness looks like there’s nothing else to cover. The Pentagon’s latest report called “Russia Military Power” was no exception. Here, without a doubt, it’s worth recalling that the defense budget of the Russian Federation in 2017 was nearly 20 times less than that of NATO. That, however, didn’t stop American analysts from sounding the alarm.

While the Pentagon has “reinvented the wheel,” Moscow demonstrates a “deep and permanent mistrust of the U.S. efforts to promote democracy throughout the world.” The report also emphasizes that the Kremlin perceives Washington’s policy as an attempt to “impose a single set of global values.”

What other conclusions have journalists arrived at after reading this kind of garbage? In The Independent, for example, they called this report a reminder of the Cold War and those times when intelligence agencies published reports, which gave a characterization of a confrontation between two superpowers.

And here’s how the Kremlin commented on the Pentagon’s conclusion that Moscow fears U.S. attempts to change power in Russia. The Russian president’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, stated that the attempt at analysis in this report is certainly unfounded. “For many years, we have repeatedly recorded attempts of outside interference in Russia’s internal affairs,” Peskov said. He added, “this is no secret to anyone, as it’s been stated repeatedly at different levels.”

An even smaller secret, including for the Western mass media, is Washington’s practically complete absence of a coherent strategy regarding the Syrian conflict. The National Interest confidently reported that the war in Syria is entering its final stage. What’s next for the country? Will the major “players” tear her apart? Or will they all be able to agree?

Analyzing the statements, decisions and actions of the U.S., Western experts speak more openly about the fact that Washington, unlike Moscow, simply does not have a clearly formulated plan for the region’s future. A different conclusion has also been vocalized: Americans risk entering a conflict with Russia and Iran. This is so much the case that the two countries publicly advise the White House to refrain from military action in the Middle East. This is despite the fact that not long ago the U.S. called itself the “key player” in the region.

Now, Western mass media not only believe that it’s unwise for American interests to carry out “ambitious actions”* against Moscow and Tehran, but encourage the White House to think about what Americans are ready to sacrifice, and if they will stand their ground when Iran and Russia provide opposition.

Does America need another war? American voters, without a doubt, answer this question unambiguously: No. Is the U.S. currently in a position to press Russia on the Middle East? Western analysts already answered this question negatively, adding, “because Russia’s military and diplomatic positions are stronger.”*

*Editor’s note: While accurately translated, this quote could not be verified.