“Russian intervention in Syria could serve as an example of how to act in power. Resolutely, purposefully and effectively. Not half-heartedly, not randomly, as, unfortunately, often are the United States,” says a military expert and specialist in the field of safety Lukasz Vikingr (Lukáš Visingr). He also stressed that the United States is very costly to their position of world power number one. In an interview with “Parlamentni leaves” Wisinger said that the European Union is in serious crisis. The collapse of the EU, according to the analyst, it may happen very soon, literally and spontaneously. In some countries, supposedly can begin even internal conflicts, so we should be prepared for very turbulent times. The so-called Old world that emerged after the Second world war and the cold war, according to the analyst, in the past.
Parlamentní listy: In a previous interview You said the following: “In the foreign policy of the United States was always present considerable idealism (I mean the spread of values) is often at the expense of realism, that is advocacy. A typical example is the attempt to establish Western-style democracy in countries where this is not possible. In addition, American presidents often repeat the Vietnam mistake, entering the war without a clear political purpose, and are fighting, as they say, with one hand behind his back, because you cannot select target. However, they undertake to advise the generals, caique military means they choose. In particular, I support Donald trump, because it clearly gives the military more freedom of action.” In this regard, do You think of the decision of Donald trump to withdraw from Syria?
Lukasz Vikingr: We need to understand that the operation in Syria began under President Obama and, unfortunately, carries the characteristic of this President’s imprint. The then head of the Intelligence Department of the Ministry of defense Michael Flynn said that US must act there in full force, to overthrow Assad and install a friendly regime or not to intervene at all. But certainly America, according to Flynn, it is not necessary to choose an intermediate position. But Obama still chose a half-hearted solution, which, however, only complicated the situation. Needless to recall the tragicomic vicissitudes of dealing with support and training so-called moderate opposition.
Then the Americans have provided great support to Syrian Kurds, but it was more of a forced step, because the Kurds are the only more or less Autonomous secular force that is not directly on the side of the regime. That is, with their help, the Americans were able to gain at least some influence if they wanted to. Now, apparently, trump finally ran out of patience, and he doesn’t want to take risks, preferring a pragmatic agreement with the other powers. This heralds the Kurds, unfortunately, the usual outcome is, after all, it seems that they again just used for political purposes and then trashed.
— Trump is now criticized for the fact that it frees up space for Putin and Iran and maybe even Turkey. Wise was the decision of the United States to leave Syria? As it is necessary to be a Western coalition?
— US operation in Syria has been very limited, and it was clear that the United States will not play a key role. In addition, I would not say that Donald trump has made a major impact in Syria. American strategic interests there tend to zero, but for Russia, on the contrary, Syria is a very important ally. However, you need to understand that we do not know all the backstage upheavals, that is what trump has agreed with Putin and Erdogan. The United States in Syria, really it is only important that Iran not hold it too firmly (this would correspond to the interests of Moscow). Thus, the basis of the agreement between trump and Putin can be the guarantee that after consolidating Syria, Russia will not allow Iran to increase its influence.
In addition, it remains unclear how it will work in Turkey and for how long she will stay in Syria, because Bashar al-Assad, of course, is planning to regain control over the entire territory of the state, and the Turks there it’s definitely not needed. Another thing that is not yet established no time frame for U.S. withdrawal. It can take, say, a few months, so the Kurds still have a chance, before they go cap in hand to Damascus. European countries, especially France, expressed support for the Kurds, but personally I very much doubt that they have the desire and capabilities to provide some specific help.
— In the words of General Stanley McChrystal, in the last 60 years, the withdrawal of American troops has always led to problems. He argues that because of this situation in certain regions destabilized. Is there such a threat in Syria, or the order will provide Russia, and maybe someone else? And what is the reason for the destabilization and subsequent problems in the care of the territory, or actually in the American intervention?
Is that the order in Syria will be supported by Russia, or rather the Syrian army with Russian and Iranian support, is beyond doubt. The Iranian Revolutionary guard on the ground and Russian air force played a decisive role, to turn the tide of the war, and the victory of the Assad regime is not far off. Russian intervention in Syria could serve as an example of how to act in power. Resolutely, purposefully and effectively. Not half-heartedly, not randomly, as, unfortunately, often operate in the United States.
The United States is very costly to their position of world power number one. As I said in a recent interview, the Americans intervene or not, they are always severely criticized for the fact that they had to act differently. From my point of view, America mostly, but not always, intervenes, guided by the right intentions, but too often wavers and sentimental. But the situation becomes more complicated, Americans are frightened and begin to look for escape routes, thereby often further complicating the situation. Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria — everywhere model is one. As for the military operations, the American operations are often just a model, but as far as further political steps does the United States have nothing to boast. Sometimes I had to hear witty comments about the fact that America is perfectly possible to win the war and lose the peace.
New year letter to an American colleague Vladimir Putin urged him to a dialogue. According to Putin, relations between Russia and America are the most important factor for strategic stability and international security. Cyril Svoboda told me in an interview that in this way Putin makes it clear: the European Union was not for him and never will be as important a partner as the United States. Do You agree with this opinion? And is it normal for relations powers?
— The Russian approach to the international arena of traditional and realistic, that is the main role in it plays a military force, it is not surprising that first the Russians put the relationship with America. After all, Russia and the USA owns a big part of the nuclear weapons in the world. In my opinion, Putin’s letter also refers to the trump’s decision to withdraw from the INF Treaty and also to talk about the start Treaty, which Moscow considers very important for the strategic balance. The European Union no one can be a full partner, as an Association of States whose interests are sometimes very different, in particular with regard to Russia.
Not so important, is normal or not. That is the reality, rather the reality on the international stage, as on her most significant role is played by the major powers and their interests. Reviving the scheme, which is called “competition powers”. Obviously, the European Union is totally unsuitable for the scheme. Idealistic notions about a liberal world order are far from reality, and to defend their interests, only the one who will act most energetically.
— The outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that Germany will seek to take on greater responsibility in addressing global problems. This is a response to the weakening of Europe on the world stage? Is this reasonable?
The question is, did Europe as a whole ever real influence, because really it was more about the influence of the dominant European States. Anyway, the desire is in Germany to take on more responsibility it seems to me absurd. The reason for the current tension in Europe is Germany’s desire to impose their ideas on other countries, so I would say that for Europe and for the world would be a better place if Germany has taken on more responsibility in the first place for what happens on its own territory. To start she should be with mass migration, Islamization and almost daily violence by migrants.
Attention, of course, would be worth to pay and stupid regulations that are pressuring the automobile industry, thanks to which Germany became a power. The Germans would be worth to reconsider the idiotic plan to abandon nuclear power, otherwise Germany will remain without electricity. The Bundeswehr gushes nonsense type of uniforms for pregnant women, and in the meantime he has quite a bit of combat-ready tanks, fighter jets and warships. Not so is the power, which should assume greater responsibility for world events. While this is only the tragicomic parody and frightening example of the complete degradation of the former power.
— What do You think about Chinese espionage and the problems with the firm “Huawei”, which is the national Institute of cybernetic and information security called threat? How real is this threat? Is it possible to compare it with the program “PRISM” (PRISM), presented by American whistleblower Edward Snowden?
— The Chinese intelligence service, of course, very active. However, as can be said about the service of other powers. If someone surprise you with various forms of espionage, we can only smile in response to such ignorance and naivety. Espionage is the second oldest craft in the world, and its essence has not changed for thousands of years. Modern information technologies open new possibilities to secretly capture the information. Thus, Edward Snowden’s revelations were not so much a surprise, and that the national security Agency of the United States engaged in such things, it was said long ago.
Similarly, for several years talked about the fact that some Chinese products have hidden these kinds of functions. Now it was announced officially, which is associated with the current commercial, technological, and intelligence war between the West and China. I think cybersecurity suspected or knew about this for a long time, and now just received a political order to inform the General public. One way or another, but the dominance of Huawei company in the field of “BTS” (BTS), i.e. what is called “mobile cells”, in fact, an unhealthy phenomenon, and I hope that this story at least will help increase competition.
— Do not in fact know of the matter is that governments all powers open the way to major technology companies, and we only choose who we will listen to the Americans or the Chinese?
I think this is a very good point. The intelligence services will always find a way to penetrate the private lives of those they are interested in. But this does not mean that we have to simplify them a job. I doubt I could have come up with something potentially more vulnerable than the Chinese mobile phone system “Android” (Android). But Huawei and Google (Google), of course, there is no monopoly on the collection of information. Apple, Facebook and other companies collect it at least as much. And surprisingly, they do so with the full consent of the users who willingly give them a lot more than I would tell some public representative.
If anyone is surprised that Google or Facebook knows, including about your health, income, and political beliefs or aesthetic preferences, it would be worth to start to think about why you yourself are reported. What search engines and social networks collect data about users, is an integral part of their function. The only question is, why then these data is used. People are willing to waive their privacy, and that of course helps those who want to manipulate them during election commercial campaigns. Personally I have no Facebook page, no phone with Android system or iOS. Fortunately, there are other smartphones. But if someone can’t manage without them, it is his free choice and he should consider the consequences.
Good we can bring to 2019 from a geopolitical point of view? What we got to fear?
I’ll let you refer to the idea of American geopolitical analyst George Friedman, who a few days ago, I wrote that the so-called Old world that emerged after the Second world war and the cold war, according to the analyst, in the past. Forever. More and more people understand this, although many still yearn for the old world and would like to return. However, there is no way back. 2019 will confirm this clearly. But the new world is in its infancy. A new international order has not yet been established, and although some things seem clear, this is not so.
China — power, is experiencing a rise, but it has a lot of problems, and his rise can quickly turn into devastating collapse. Apparently, to displace trump will try with double zeal, but American politics have changed radically, and European countries must finally understand that the days of absolute guarantee from the Atlantic passed.
The European Union is in serious crisis, and, I think, the last chance for the salvation of all those positive things that gave European integration is the may European Parliament elections. The collapse of the EU, according to the analyst, it may happen very soon, literally and spontaneously. In some countries, supposedly can begin even internal conflicts, so we should be prepared for very turbulent times. But what at first glance seems like a big threat, actually can mean a huge chance.
Read more •••