Message to Putin: signals and subtexts

Experts about the motivations and pathos of the message of the President of the Russian Federation

MOSCOW – IN Russia, in every way continue to discuss the part of speech of the message of President Putin to the Federal Assembly, which was devoted to the new military-technical developments of Russian designers. The tone is very different from stressed skeptical to attempts at serious analysis.

Director of Moscow Carnegie center Dmitri Trenin sure that in Putin’s words: “nobody listened to Us. Listen now” is the main motive of the message of the President of the Russian Federation to the United States. However, he believes that there is no reason to believe that the Russian President’s approach will work, “as the Kremlin wants”. This analyst writes in the article “the Conflict is unique. What will happen to relations between Russia and the United States after Putin’s message”.

“Information about the new Russian weapon was a surprise for many in Russia and in the world, but not for those who are developing the national security strategy, military doctrine and nuclear policies, the United States, in particular, says the expert. All three guidance documents on these issues, (…) recognize the growth of the military power of Russia, which once again, after 30 years, was awarded the status of a major (now along with China) rival and potential enemy of the United States.”

However, the American leadership came to the conclusion that the opposite assumption, Vladimir Putin, and has not embarked on the search for agreements, says Dmitry Trenin.

“Unfortunately, we have also to admit that the real agenda between Russia and the United States for the foreseeable future has shrunk to a single point- preventing the risk of inadvertent occurrence of war between them. So you can leave to future generations of leaders the spirit of the country”, – he concluded.

We will remind, in the Ministry of defense said that not surprised by the statements of President Putin. Press Secretary of the Pentagon Dana white noted that the U.S. army is able to protect the American people from any threats.

State Department spokesman Heather Nauert also stressed that the bellicose and aggressive statements of the Russian leader did not the US authorities by surprise.

At the same time, in comments to the Russian service “voice of America” Director of the Carnegie Moscow center admitted that he does not consider Putin’s statement software.

“This is a campaign speech, inspired by three documents adopted by the United States, especially the “nuclear policy Review”, he added. Or if you prefer, an illustrated response to these American documents. Putin did not put forward any new initiatives. Now, if he said: we place such a system in such Western regions of the Russian Federation is a different matter. So, in my opinion, this is political speech, having an internal and external recipient”.

Also Dmitri Trenin noted that Russia has a very small set of power tools, and the Americans them – a huge box.

“If Russia could beat, it would beat the ruble. But this does not work”, he concluded.

Meanwhile, the debate over the plausibility Putin announced military hardware continues. So, according to the head of the space policy Institute Ivan Moiseyev, cruise missiles, nuclear power plants, referred to by the President of the Russian Federation, is not in service in any country in the world, including Russia, because they cannot be created in principle.

“There is some confusion, such things are impossible, and not needed in General, – quotes the scientist Insider. – It is impossible for a cruise missile to put a nuclear engine. Yes and no propulsion. There is in the development of one megawatt engine class, but he space and of course no tests in 2017 could not be held– well, if in 2027, this setup will have.”

According to head of military economy laboratory of the Gaidar Institute Vasily Zatsepin, a statement Putin looks more like “as a cry of despair”.

No wonder the media called, the message to the Federal Assembly “message of the United States,” said Vasily Zatsepin, “Now the ball is on the side of the West, see how they react. For me one thing is clear: this is a promotional speech in the election campaign and claims to re-election”.

As for some of the mentioned developments, they certainly were long and who knows with what degree of success, the expert continued: “for Example, the state of our space industry is not optimistic. And all together generates a greater degree of uncertainty. When our probable enemy knows that the rocket will fly in his direction, he was scared. And when we know that she can fly is not there, then it becomes scary.”

According to head of the laboratory of military Economics of the Institute Gaidar, it turns out “the horror from both sides.”