Il presidente iraniano Ahmadinejad annuncia che l’Iran farà presto “il passo finale” sul nucleare.
Nel frattempo, come ricorda M K Bhadrakumar su Asia Times di oggi:
The recent US congressional mid-term elections ended up only adding to the violently ambivalent Russian-US relationship. While for the rest of the world the elections demystified the pipe dream of neo-conservatism and its limited number of permutations - such as the Iraq war and the democratization of the Middle East - the mood in Moscow was of a dark realism over clean slates and new leases that might never arrive.
Il mondo, a est dell’Europa, entra in una fase di “multipolarità sfaccettata”, alquanto caotica. Si può prevedere quali temi domineranno le relazioni internazionali nel 2007:
La questione nucleare iraniana
La questione nucleare nord-coreana
La sicurezza energetica e il ruolo russo
La permanenza della tensione russo-americana nell’arco di crisi dalla Bielorussia al Caucaso via Moldova-Ucraina
La crisi politica turca e le reticenze europee a integrare Ankara
Le crisi post-belliche in Iraq e Afghanistan
L’instabilità libanese
Bhadrakumar ricorda comunque come
The influential head of the Politika Foundation, Vyacheslav Nikonov, was voicing a common opinion in Moscow when he said, “The US failure in Iraq is just as painful as the one the US suffered in Vietnam - if not more serious.” The corollary of such a thought is of course that the US dogma of a “unipolar” world has become simply not sustainable any longer.
Russia sees advantages here - having consciously decided to step out of the Western orbit as a matter of destiny, and even to aspire to create a Moscow-centered system. Nikonov explained that in the “multipolar” world order that is shaping up, which may involve 10-15 power centers, given the absence of a “system of collective security with the participation of the US but also China, Russia, Europe, Japan, India and other leading players”, what may ensue in the coming period is a “game without rules” that could well deteriorate into a “multipolar chaos”.
In such a scenario, US policy toward Russia has to become simply more responsible, no matter the domestic party politics in the United States. The Kremlin would therefore estimate that for the next two years at least, the traditional conservative Republicans who have emerged in the corridors of power in the White House in the recent past are of far greater consequence than the new crop of Democrats grandstanding on the Hill during a presidential election year.
For it was they who were usually responsive to the compulsions of ensuring strategic stability with Moscow on a mutual basis, and ensuring that relations with Russia should be based on cooperation rather than crisis.
