The world economy is on fire, with fuel prices to soar and inflation to gallop without a strong safety net. From the Russia is facing sanctionsbut heavy costs are paid by the US, but mainly by the EU. The war in Ukraine does not take place only on the ground, where biblical catastrophes take place with loss of 45% of its GDP so far, but also at sea. There Russia is changing, through structural changes, the EEZ and its rights, seeking to become sovereign, living in the region with Turkey.
According to Today’s, Russian revisionist policy starts in Europe and reaches the Middle East via the Caucasus. It is being answered by the US, the EU and NATO on the basis of an economic war and the construction of a new deterrent, which feeds the logic of the Russian defeat in Ukraine, while at the same time New fronts are threatened in Sweden and Finland if they join the North Atlantic Alliance.
Among the structural changes that Russia expects to bring are:
First, the change of the Russian EEZ in the Black Sea, over which it expects to dominate and share it for the most part with Turkey, whose policy is based on the Blue Homeland. We have two countries reviewing strategies that could come together instead of colliding. Hence Erdogan’s outstanding policy. The changes are imposed by force of arms and violate international law. With the occupation of Crimea, the EEZs in the region have already changed, while there will be further changes after the conquest of Mariupol. There will be more if Odessa falls and Russia reaches Transnistria.
In this case Moscow will create a strategic foothold from Transnistria to Belarus, through Mariupol and the Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine, trapping the country and leaving only one exit to its west. A second outer arc is created by St. Petersburg to Kaliningrad, North Sea, which has two sides. One is defensive and the other is offensive. It is, therefore, related to the expansion of NATO in Finland and Sweden. An internal geostrategic arc is being created from St. Petersburg to Belarus. The two arches, one to Kaliningrad and the other to Belarus, constitute a geostrategic horseshoe, enclosing the Baltic States.
Energy headache and interests
Second, the Middle East through the Caucasus. Control of the Black Sea not only puts an end to NATO’s expansion into Georgia, but also creates a foothold for consolidating geopolitical interests in the Caucasus and from there to the Middle East and Asia., which is now an energy and vital space of Russia. Why; Because that is where Moscow is turning for the sale of natural gas, due to the energy dependence that the EU has set as its policy.
It is a policy with obstacles, because, on the one hand, the dependencies are great, and, on the other hand, there is no time for a quick reaction. The interests of the Member States differ. Therefore, a common component should be found. For this very reason, last week no decision was made on the sixth package of sanctions and there was talk of a transitional period in matters of energy dependence. Already, India and China are filling their depots with oil from Russia, paying low prices. Moscow’s ticks are already high, despite Western sanctions over price spikes, with no indication on the horizon that they will be curbed. Russian revenues have increased by 45% compared to the previous year. Russia is set in economic isolation from the West, but the ruble has recovered, At the same time, inflation rates in the EU and the US are rising sharply due to rising fuel prices, the food chain problem, electricity shortages and three other factors:
a) The free market can not function smoothly on the basis of the rules of supply and demand.
b) There is a scandal.
c) Russia’s deterrent nuclear threats are exacerbating the situation, as it is a psychological war and a sign of determination.
The use of nuclear is not recommended at this stage as a serious choice, since the Moscow controls the situation even if it has losses.
It does not mean mutual costs and holocaust, which can be decided by Putin, if he loses the war and feels dishonored. And that’s why the West needs to be very careful. That is, to know, in the context of a rational game, to what extent it pulls the rope without weakening any of its deterrent capacity. That is why the issue of NATO’s expansion to Sweden and Finland should be studied in depth. If ever, but how will it be done. And what effects will occur. Will the benefit outweigh the costs? What kind of cost or benefit will arise?