Post-Helsinki, is Cold War 2 off the table?

Now that the flurry of over-wrought media coverage has subsided, maybe we need to attend to geostrategic issues that surfaced through the recent Helsinki Summit.

In opening remarks for the press conference at the recent Helsinki summit, Russian President, Mr Vladimir Putin observed:

Distinguished Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen, negotiations with the President of the United States, Donald Trump, took place in a frank and business-like atmosphere. I think we can call it a success and a very fruitful round of negotiations . . . . It’s quite clear to everyone that the bilateral relationship are going through a complicated stage. Yet those impediments, the current tension, the tense atmosphere essentially have no solid reason behind it. The Cold War is a thing of past. The era of acute ideological confrontation of the two countries is a thing of the remote past — it’s a vestige of the past. The situation of the world changed dramatically.

So, we see tensions acknowledged (and tell-tale diplomatic language for a bit of a verbal dust-up: "frank . . .") even as it was correctly said that THE Cold War is a thing of the Past -- the USSR and Warsaw Pact have been dead for nearly thirty years. To some extent, that simply means that regimes come and go but facts of geostrategy ever shall remain. So long as the Russian and American states are respectively the major Eurasian continental power and the major maritime power,

[BREAK IN TRANSMISSION: What, you think you can realistically ignore, shun, shame or subvert the state with the No. 2 biggest, working "big red" -- nuke -- "button" in the world? (BTW, that's the Kim Jong Un standard.) Wake up and smell some pretty strong coffee. While I am at it, here is a telling tweet:]

[context:]

. . .  there will be divergent and often conflicting interests. Where also, Mr Putin would be well advised to consider the implications of his adventurism in the Ukraine and elsewhere as triggers for global tensions.

On Mr Trump's part, he clearly needed to be better briefed and while perhaps some "frankness" with Germany and the UK was needed, given the tendency to free-ride on the American coat-tails, his own recent language was likely over the top.

Going on, Mr Putin also observed:

Today both Russia and the United States face a whole new set of challenges. Those include a dangerous maladjustment of mechanisms for maintaining international security and stability, regional crises, the creeping threat of terrorism and transnational crime. It’s the snowballing problems in the economy, environmental risks and other sets of challenges. We can only cope with these challenges if we join the ranks and work together. Hopefully, we will reach this understanding with our American partners . . . . As major nuclear powers, we bear special responsibility for maintaining international security . . . . We favor the continued cooperation in counterterrorism and maintaining cybersecurity. I’d like to point out specifically that our special services are cooperating quite successfully together. The most recent example is their operational cooperation within the recently concluded World football Cup . . . . 

As far as Syria is concerned, the task of establishing peace and reconciliation in this country could be the first showcase example of the successful joint work. Russia and the United States apparently can proactively take leadership on this issue and organize the interaction to overcome humanitarian crisis and help Syrian refugees go back to their homes . . . The south of Syria should be brought to the full compliance with the treaty of 1974 about the separation of forces, about separation of forces of Israel and Syria. This will bring peace to Golan Heights. And bring more peaceful relationship between Syria and Israel and also to provide security of the state of Israel. Mr. President paid special attention to the issue during today’s negotiations. I would like to confirm that Russia is interested in this development and this will act accordingly . . . .  

We’re glad that the Korean peninsula issue is starting to resolve. To a great extent, it was possible thanks to the personal engagement of President Trump who opted for dialogue instead of confrontation. 

 How should we take this and other topics?

First, Russia is not the USSR, it is far weaker and is much less of a military power. It is still one of the two leading nuclear powers, but the global threat of Communist subjugation is over. So, Putin can be taken for a sometimes aggressive Russian nationalist with a hunger for economic power (and likely, personal wealth). He is obviously autocratic and is likely bloody-handed. But in the end he recognises limits and that on the whole global and Middle Eastern stability are better than chaos sliding into war.

Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post, adds:

Two critical issues, Iran’s presence in Syria and North Korea’s nuclear arsenal, were the subject of a significant amount of attention from Trump and Putin during the press conference. Their remarks on both subjects made clear just how critical the meeting was for U.S. national security interests and for global stability in the short and long-term.

Before they met in Helsinki, the prospect of war between Israel and Iran/Hezbollah in Syria was all but certain. On Monday, Syrian regime forces — which are dominated by Iran through its Revolutionary Guard Corps officers, Hezbollah units, and Iranian-controlled Shiite militia forces — began their press to seize control over the Quneitra region on the Syrian side of the border with Israel.

If Iran is able to entrench its own forces, or Hezbollah forces, in Syria generally, and along the border with Israel specifically, Israel will have to go to war to eject Iran by force. Israel simply cannot accept a strategic environment that involves a permanent Iranian presence in Syria, particularly given that Iran controls Lebanon through Hezbollah.

In their remarks, both Putin and Trump said that they are committed to Israel’s security. Putin said that he accepts Israel’s position that the 1974 disengagement of forces agreement between Israel and Syria must be implemented. The agreement bars Syrian military forces from deploying to the border with Israel and limits their deployment in the area adjacent to it. Trump stated outright that the U.S. supports Israel’s efforts to prevent Iran from entrenching its forces in Syria.

Glick draws a major (and likely true) inference:

Trump’s statement that,“the United States will not allow Iran to benefit from our successful campaign against ISIS” dovetailed a statement by National Security Advisor John Bolton ahead of the summit. Speaking Sunday with ABC News, Bolton said, “I think the president has made it clear that we are there [in Syria] until the ISIS territorial caliphate is removed and as long as the Iranian menace continues throughout the Middle East.”

 Iran will understand the remarks of both men to mean that the U.S. will fight with Israel in any war with Iranian-controlled forces in Syria to ensure their withdrawal, just as they fought with their allies in Syria to defeat ISIS.Then there is Putin. Putin’s statement of support for Israel’s security and peaceful relations between Syria and Israel also sent a signal to Iran. Whereas Putin has worked with Iran to enable Assad to survive and restore his control over territory previously controlled by rebel forces, Putin will not cooperate with Iran if it chooses to remain in Syria and face Israeli and perhaps U.S. forces in battle.

In short, containment of the re-emerging Persian Empire in its reach across Iraq and Syria to its de facto province in southern Lebanon. Multiply this by the US pullout on the deeply flawed nuke deal, and the message to the Mullahs is plain: back off.

If that were not plain enough, we see a more- than- merely- "frank" July 22 tweet by Mr Trump:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump Jul 22

To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!

We may sum up: Russia acknowledges its limits and is seeking to support general stability, Korea seems to be simmering down, Iran is on notice -- perhaps leading up to talks similar to those with Korea. 

Where, of course, Middle East stability is vital to keeping oil prices within reason and thus to global economic prosperity. In turn, this feeds the Caribbean's Tourism-dominated, fossil fuel-dependent economies.

And, though Mr Trump's style is more that of a New York building contractor (I have never forgotten his distasteful "grab 'em" remarks) than a smooth, well-polished diplomat, that may be about as good a deal as we could hope for towards global stability. END