The source of my last article is mostly The Economist, the printed version. However, there are also articles available online.

Not a cold war, but a cold tiff

Feb 15th 2007 | MOSCOW
From The Economist print edition

Here are some sentences from this article:

• Concerning what Mr. Putin said:

"The world, Mr Putin added, was witnessing “an almost uncontained hyper use of force”, which was plunging it into “an abyss of permanent conflicts”. Lest anyone mistake him, he specified that “the United States has overstepped its national borders in every way,” exhibiting “a greater and greater disdain” for international law."

• Concerning the efforts to enlarge its influence on neighbours:

"The Russians saw their defeat in Ukraine as evidence of perfidious American meddling in Russia's sphere of influence. For the Americans, the debacle showed that a truth plain in Mr Putin's domestic policies—that he was not a real democrat—would affect his country's foreign behaviour too."

• Concerning the economic power:

"It [Russia] has the biggest hydrocarbon reserves in the world, which can be used as “tools of intimidation and blackmail”, as Dick Cheney alleged in an aggressive speech in Vilnius in May 2006, to which Mr Putin's Munich address was in part a riposte. It has lots of nuclear arms to underpin its self-esteem. But it does not have the conventional forces, nor the economic and ideological resources to compete with America globally as it did in the cold war."

• Concerning the american influence in Russia:

"He [Putin] again insisted that non-governmental organisations active in Russia but funded from abroad were the tools of foreign governments."

Another article states the following:

Russia and the Middle East

The bear is happy to be back

Feb 8th 2007 | CAIRO
From The Economist print edition

• Cold War:

"[...] Last summer's fight between Israel and the Lebanese guerrilla group Hizbullah echoed the cold war: a clash between proxy forces that tested armaments and tactics. While Israel's American-supplied gadgetry was far more lethal, Hizbullah's Russian weapons were effective too. Its anti-tank missiles knocked out scores of Israel's armoured vehicles."

• Influence on other countries:

"After Russia secured a $7.5 billion deal to supply Algeria with fighter aircraft, tanks and anti-aircraft missiles, its army chief of staff, Yuri Baluyevsky, recently echoed Mr Putin, saying that the American effort to create “a unipolar world” was fomenting crisis."

• Iran:

"Russia would like to think that the recent slight softening of Iran's public tone and the rising domestic criticism of its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, may owe something to fears of losing its only legitimate outside source of nuclear technology [Russia]."

These citations aim only to underline what I said in my previous article. It doesn't mean that everything is right or wrong. It is interesting to follow the last evolutions.
Recently Russia has shown its interest to buy parts of EADS, Europe's pride. It is not very likely, in my opinion, that France and Germany will agree to those plans, but it clearly shows that Russia wants to enlarge its global influence. It seems to be obvious that Mr. Putin wants to make out of Russia a new superpower, opposing or challenging the United States of America.

But Russia is not the only important new player on a geopolitical basis. China is also eager to play the role of the new political superstar.

A new Cold War! We lived the end of the first cold war, are we going to live the beginning of the next episode?

Russia lost a lot of its power at the end of the first Cold War. They went from one crisis to another, their empire busted into pieces. Russia wasn't able to really prove its strength until recently. The last years the new Russia came back on the international platform, playing with its muscles. The hands in its neighbouring countries like Belarus, Georgia and Ukraine shows that they are starting to stop sleeping.

Iran. Powerless until the moment where an international power backs their plans, and confirms that they believe in Iran's honesty. Who is this international power? Of course, Russia is. They supported Iran, not only because they have economic interest in the region (everyone actually has this) but because Russia turns the wheel now. However, by letting the last UN resolution and as a consequence the sanctions against Iran pass Russia showed that Iran has to be careful in handling with them. It is Russia which dictates the rules and not Iran.

Russia also plays with Europe. Europe, as one of the leading economies, needs energy. And a huge part of this energy comes from Russia. Until present the lobbies have discouraged the politicians from changing anything of their energy policy because they feared losing money. The consequence could be now that every one of Europe's habitants will lose money. We have now higher energy prices due to the pressure of Russia, which also pressures Iran, which itsself has a lot of influence in Iraq and other countries in the Middle East.
China on the other side is the laughing third, accepting Russia's energy with open arms and willing to pay the right price for it...But can China really go this way? Can they mess up with Europe by accepting Russia's gamble for power? Europe represents an enormous market and the consequences of an "angry" Europe, installing import tariffs and other barriers could delete the economic advantage of cheap production in China...companies would rather go to Vietnam or other South-East Asian countries.

However, Iran and Russia, two players, some years before not in our minds, now present in every single newspaper. The last meeting of the Middle East quartet (EU, USA, UN, Russia) in Berlin this week Russia and USA came pretty close to a conflict, disagreeing on the new government to be formed in Palestine.

But can Russia afford such a conflict? Are they economical stable enough to really support a new Cold War? To answer this question we should ask ourselves if they ever have been strong enough to be a global player. Economically they have never been such a big superpower. Sure, their industry and their military-industry has been enormous but by the end their system collapsed because they simply forgot about the people living in their state. Those people wanted more freedom and where freedom is there can be no Cold War because it would need propaganda to create support in their own population. Being shut from the outside like North Korea, Russia would never do this or could never afford such a situation. Aren't they also depended on our knowledge, our machinery and technology?

There could be an endlessly discussion on this subject. But what is clear from now on is that Russia is back on the international scene. It is the comeback of the former Popstar. Russia is seeking to become a superpower again and aren't they on a good way?