Why There Will Be No Big War

Network is overflowed with discussion of estimates of Yaakov Kedmi stated by him in the first two broadcasts "Special Folder" on the Israeli Russian-speaking channel "Iton TV" about situation in Ukraine. The Internet is overflowed with messages like: "The Israeli military-political expert, the former head of a secret service "Nativ" Yakov Kedmi claims... ", "Putin will take all Ukraine — the Israeli intelligent officer Yakov Kedmi" and so on.

I will dare not to agree with the former head of the former Israeli intelligence service "Bureau on Communications "Nativ" Yasha Kedmi, though his opinion is worth to pay appropriate attention. "Former" — because in 1990 that organization which was engaged in expeditious ensuring of emigration of Jews from Eastern Europe and especially the Soviet Union to Israel lost its quasi-confidential status and special powers together with it. On the other hand, Mr. Kedmi served there from 1977 and possesses special preparation. Thus it would be more correct to define Mr. Kedmi supervising that organization from 1992 to 1999 as the former employee, but not as the former head of secret service.

It doesn't change that certainty that Mr. Kedmi remains clever and knowing person, however he doesn’t consider one important factor in his estimates. Let’s start from the beginning. Kedmi states harmonous and very interesting concept therefore I will dare to bring it almost completely with insignificant notes.

Kedmi sees situation as follows: "Certain political group which has very extremist moods against Russia and against the Russians, than it was at Yanukovych and Tymoshenko comes to power in Ukraine. When Russia comes to consideration of this group it remembers very well that one of aspirations of the government was not so much and not only entry into the European Union, but also accession to NATO … Accession of Ukraine to NATO is similar to death to Russia, i.e. it is deadly danger to the state as NATO military bases in the territory of Ukraine turns all system of antimissile defense of Russia into metal heap and threaten… all vital centers of Russia. Russia remains without defense. Proceeding from it, as far as I understand, it was decided in Russia not to allow entrance of NATO to Ukraine. While it is possible to interfere with entrance of NATO to Ukraine only having interfered with introduction of Ukraine to Europe …

To establish there such government which will never take step menacing safety of the Russian State. Russia in this regard is absolutely right that there is no sense to dismember Ukraine or to take some part from it. It supports unity of Ukraine … because that part which won't enter will remain part of the westernized Ukraine. Bases of NATO will be located in westernized part of Ukraine and therefore Russia wants that all Ukraine to the last millimeter on the western border will be uniform state from the Crimea to Uzhgorod. Change of the power in Ukraine has to happen with the help of citizens of Ukraine. Therefore Russia won't introduce armies unless situation there will completely run wild.

It … will help the Ukrainian population of the southeast regions to form own political and military force so that to eliminate that power which on the Russian concepts is not legitimate and seized power in Kiev. The only thing that the Russian armies can capture, and it is logical, is nuclear power plants to prevent diversion... Nuclear power plants, strategic objects, probably objects with rockets and air-to-surface missiles. It is quite reasonable if it will come to it, some airports... So today Russia tries to consolidate.. those forces in Ukraine which resist to the present power in Kiev and will be ready to replace it. If it is possible to replace the power which today the president of Ukraine called illegitimate peacefully — no problem. Though if it isn't possible, it is necessary to do it by force, but using efforts of citizens of Ukraine, not of the Russian army".

To answer the question about possible resistance Kedmi answers: "There’s no Ukrainian army. There is no such concept. The Ukrainian army has been spread out and plundered long ago. There are only people wearing form of the Ukrainian army, it is probable that some of them, as well as people not wearing form of the Ukrainian army, will try to prevent it. Though it doesn’t matter".

Further he reminds: "More than sixty years ago other president of the country which is called the most democratic, Kennedy, put the world on the verge of nuclear war only because there were Soviet rockets in Cuba. So today the leadership of the Russian State will safeguard the state … not less, than Kennedy safeguarded his".

As to possibility of the political decision the expert is pessimistic: "Russia will hardly go on any agreements with the West because practice showed that agreements on dissolution of the Warsaw Pact which Gorbachev tried to sign, agreement on Libya and the last agreement which was announced by Yanukovych existed 20 minutes or half an hour. That is Russia will hardly make any agreement which don’t worth paper on which they are written".

Kedmi set as an example inevitability of military reaction of Israel in response to similar approach of rockets of Iran or Al Kaida to the Israeli borders, and in response to objection of the host that NATO is nevertheless more legitimate than Al Kaida answers: "Rockets don't ask about legitimacy … Rockets of NATO unlike Al-Qaeda rockets have thermonuclear warheads... As to the question of legitimacy, I will give you other example. What happened in Egypt — they moved Morsi away. The United States declared it military coup, having inflicted economic and military sanctions on the new power in Egypt. Though what happened in Ukraine can’t be compared to what happened in Egypt, but in Egypt the government is "illegitimate", and the Americans apply sanctions. While what was done in Kiev on Maidan is "democratic", according to the same standards. So, legitimacy in this case is conditional, false, forged, it has no relation, the more so it is a question of rockets, not of bureaucratic chating".

In the second program devoted to the Ukrainian question, Mr. Kedmi made one more important remark: "In relation to Ukraine I want to note one more moment that, among other things, the problem is, by and large, purely economic. So, the chairman of the European Union told that Ukraine can't count that Europe would give it those money which they asked because, firstly, Europe doesn’t have such money, and secondly, it would lead to indignation of other countries – members of the European Union. As members of the European Union they will be indignant: why you give such sums to the country which is not the member of the European Union instead of giving them to us? We also want not the smaller sums, but the European Union has no money for it. So, if the president of the United States allocated to Ukraine one billion dollars, and the European Union would also allocate some sum, it wouldn’t be enough to Ukraine in today's situation, then Ukraine would slowly slip to economic catastrophe".

If to summarize this position, the Israeli expert considers that Eurointegration of Ukraine will lead to its accession to NATO that in its turn will entail placement of the American systems of arms menacing Russia from East side of the Carpathians. He fairly believes that Russia won't be able to reconcile to such state of affairs and will tries its best to form in Kiev such government with which it will be able to deal. I absolutely agree with the assessment that Russia is interested in preservation of territorial integrity of Ukraine, most likely in much bigger degree, than someone else.

However in the statement "Russia will hardly make any agreement which don’t worth paper on which they are written" I would replaced the word "West" to the "USA". Harmonous chain of reasonings of Mr. Kedmi meanwhile bears signs of not so rare for Israelis contemptuous neglect of Europe.

As many of his compatriots Mr. Kedmi is inclined to underestimate role of Western Europe owing to aspiration of the Europeans not to strain relations with potential disturbers of tranquility at any cost traditional for them during last decades. However, Mr. Putin knowing Europe, by my assessment, much better counts on it.

Times when all major decisions of NATO were made not in Brussels, but in Washington sank into oblivion long ago. Now the Europeans have no scruples to veto the American offers and won't allow to place the American rockets in Ukraine, not to mention non-conventional warheads, if they should pay for it with return of not forgotten nightmare.

Germany and France will not agree to become hostages in Pentagon games again. The last thing they want to receive as a result of Eurointegration of Ukraine is the Belarusian woods teeming with self-propelled launchers full of iron and fire, ready to fall upon Berlin and Paris every minute.

The Russian management, undoubtedly, won’t remain indifferent to a question of the one who will come to the power in Kiev and will involve own bandits in counterbalance to battle-planes and saboteurs having now accelerated training under supervision of mercenaries of Eric Prince. However at last the Kremlin will try to agree with inclined to agreement Europeans.

What is, in this case, happening in the Crimea? Everything isn't so dramatic as the Israeli expert thinks. When at the end of last year the same forces which in due time declared the Kharkov agreements about stay of the Russian Black Sea Fleet contradicting the Constitution of Ukraine began Euromaidan, the Russian analysts had no doubts to what it can lead.

Speaking about "placement" of the BSF bases of the Russian Federation in the Crimea instead of "use" of existing bases, lawyers of the Ukrainian opposition used rough juggling. It became clear from that point that pro-American oligarchs of Ukraine decided finally to squeeze into NATO using all possible ways and bases of the Russian fleet became burr in the saddle for them.

The Russian side started preparing for the worst. "Steel ring of safety" of Sochi Olympic Games seemed to many certain reinsurance, however it was a question of concentration of forces capable to react to two crises at the same time — in Sochi and in the Crimea. Final decision was made in February and, according to messages of the foreign sources, magnates close to the Kremlin waiting for economic sanctions transferred their assets from the American and European banks to South East Asia two months ago.

Over 85% of the population of Russia to some extent consider the Crimea Russian therefore the government can count on popularity of its actions, though good judgment and not aspiration to popularity is behind these actions. Events in Libya, Egypt, Syria and other countries showed the Kremlin importance of preservation of presence at the southern seas. Sceptics will tell that the Black Sea Fleet is too weak to resist to potential opponent, however this approach is a little bit simplified. In order that the Russian fleet solved tasks set there is no need in opposition to fleet of NATO, the more so it isn’t the most probable opponent.

Moreover, the Kremlin knows things that haven’t become property of general public yet and is carefully suppressed by the western press. Today the Russian Fleet isn't comparable with the American, and probably will never be equal to it. The continental power doesn't have need to have fleet comparable with fleet of the largest Atlantic power, but the trend is important. The trend is that Russia takes steps to a gradual exit from reigning for decade ruin, whereas close to bankruptcy administration of Obama possessing enormous (on paper) potential, randomly does everything possible and impossible to cut expenditures on the armed forces, and it touched Naval Forces as well.

In due time virtual photo of five multi-billion nuclear aircraft carriers "Dwight Eisenhower", "George Bush", "Enterprise", "Harry Truman" and "Abraham Lincoln" together near the mooring wall of the base Norfolk (Virginia), against other big and well-known ships which aÓÓording to the belief of the publiÓ should have prowled the oÓeans at that very moment appeared in the Internet.

Now I have in my e-mail box draft copies of lists of well-known admirals, Óaptains I rank and other old salts who have been unexpectedly dismissed by administration of Obama in the pride of career, often with reduÓtion and without sufficient length of service to save on their pensions. These lists are formed from memory and on personal acquaintances by retired generals and admirals who already have no access to databases of personnel officers, but actively discuss "shake up" and "high treason". If it doesn’t reminds anyone anything?

However the less forces and means, the more menaÓing is rhetoric. It is possible to meet the following passages in today's editorial article of "New York Times": "the main question is not simply "who owns the Crimea". The real problem is in the way the president of Russia Vladimir Putin threw down the gage: sending of the Russian armies for capture of control in the Crimea; cooked-up nonexistent "fascist" threats for the Russian population; refusal to recognize provisional government in Kiev; appeals to false referendum in the Crimea on Sunday, vote in Russia on March, 21st which outcome is predetermined".

I am ready to agree with "sending of the Russian armies for capture of control in the Crimea", though there are no proofs and the same Yaakov Kedmi considers that it can be faithful to the government of the Crimea special troops of the Black Sea Fleet of Ukraine, the remains of "Berkut" and other similar forces. In this case they simply have no reasons to hide registration numbers of vehicles, if those were provided by the Russian side.

I Óertainly agree with predictability of outcome of vote in Russia. All the rest is mixture of truth and lie which has been cooked up on the known recipe. It’s somehow unsubstantially for respectful newspaper which has deserved 112 Pulitzer Prizes. After these passages there’s appeal to the Europeans to apply economic sanctions against Russia, not paying attention to irreparable injury for their own economy.

Though, it is possible that it seems quite substantial for the USA, I don't know. In any case, I find it difficult to imagine that Le Monde or Süddeutsche Zeitung used similar simple propaganda methods or urged the Americans to cause damage to themselves. It is one more reason why the Kremlin would solve the Ukrainian question with the Europeans.

Send by mail

Print