TEHRAN - A geopolitical analyst says that Russia is seriously concerned that the U.S. would clandestinely deploy strike weapons, including hypersonic missiles, to Ukraine.

“Russian intelligence is seriously concerned that the U.S. will clandestinely deploy strike weapons, including hypersonic missiles, to the region and in particular to Ukraine under the cover of so-called ‘anti-missile systems’,” Andrew Korybko tells the Tehran Times.
Korybko adds, “Right now there’s an undeclared U.S.-provoked missile crisis in Europe.” 

With Russian troops massing along Ukraine’s borders, it appears that Moscow and Washington will have a new escalation over Ukraine. 

“All that Russia wants is to return to the status quo before the bloc (NATO) incorporated former members of the Warsaw Pact in 1999.”In December, Russia published a proposal for two agreements with the United States and NATO that would roll back Western military activity in Ukraine and elsewhere in Eastern Europe, in essence re-establishing a sphere of Russian influence in what used to be parts of the Soviet Union.

On one hand, U.S. officials say many of the proposals are nonstarters for the Western politicians, who insist that Cold War-style regions of influence are a relic of the past and that countries should be able to choose their own alliances.

On the other hand, Russian officials regard it as a plot to undercut Russia’s nuclear capabilities to force it to make more concessions.

“The U.S. is plotting to do this in order to undercut Russia’s nuclear second-strike capabilities so as to place the Eurasian Great Power in a position of nuclear blackmail that can consequently result in coercing it into making unilateral concessions towards the West,” Korybko argues.

Following is the text of the interview: 

Q: How do you see Western media hype over the Russia-Ukraine dispute?

A: It’s less of a Russian-Ukrainian dispute like the U.S.-led Western mainstream media deliberately misportray it as and more of a Russian-American one. Right now there’s an undeclared U.S.-provoked missile crisis in Europe. Russian intelligence is seriously concerned that the U.S. will clandestinely deploy strike weapons, including hypersonic missiles, to the region and in particular to Ukraine under the cover of so-called “anti-missile systems”. 

The U.S. is plotting to do this in order to undercut Russia’s nuclear second-strike capabilities so as to place the Eurasian Great Power in a position of nuclear blackmail that can consequently result in coercing it into making unilateral concessions towards the West.

Q: Are there any differences between the U.S. and the Europeans over Ukraine?

A: Officially speaking, both sides have reaffirmed that Ukraine has the sovereign right to join NATO if it wishes, but there’s speculation that the U.S. might be willing to moderate that stance behind the scenes in order to comply with one of Russia’s red lines demanding that it not be admitted to the alliance. The other one relates to the deployment of strike weapons, including hypersonic ones, near its borders. The U.S. exercises hegemony over the EU through NATO and therefore is the only real decision maker that matters in this respect. If it tacitly reaches a “gentlemen’s agreement” with Russia on those issues in pursuit of the greater good of strategic stability, then the Europeans would be powerless to stop it.

Q: What has been the impact of the Biden presidency on collaboration between NATO members?

A: The Biden administration pledged that it’ll reverse the Trump administration’s unilateralism towards the U.S.’ NATO allies and reverts back to a multilateral policy, but this might not really be the case in practice. The incumbent president’s national security team, influenced as they are by their anti-Chinese “deep state” faction (a term collectively referring to the country’s permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies), seems to regard China as a greater long-term strategic threat to American interests than Russia. Their subversive anti-Russian “deep state” rivals are trying to sabotage the success of these de-escalation talks since they want to maintain the U.S.’ “strategy of tension” towards Russia.

Q: What will be the fallouts of any possible confrontation between NATO and Russia? Do you predict China to be engaged in such a clash?

A: Nobody can accurately predict how any possible hot conflict between NATO and Russia would play out, nor exactly how likely one is to occur, but it would likely be very difficult to contain due to the nuclear factor. That’s why it’s imperative to avert this scenario at all costs, hence the ongoing talks to that end. The Biden administration’s prevailing anti-Chinese “deep state” faction, which is one of Trump’s most enduring legacies, wants to de-escalate tensions with Russia in Europe in order for the Pentagon to be able to redeploy some of their forces from there to the Asia-Pacific so that they can more aggressively “contain” China. Their subversive anti-Russian “deep state” rivals are desperately trying to stop this.

 Q: Why is Russia so sensitive about NATO expansion to its sphere of influence?

A: Russia has credible and legitimate concerns that the U.S.’ plot to deploy strike weapons, including hypersonic ones, close to its borders could undercut its nuclear second-strike capabilities and thus place the country in a position of nuclear blackmail vis-à-vis the West. NATO’s continual expansion eastward provides the pretext for doing so in those member states. All that Russia wants is to return to the status quo before the bloc incorporated former members of the Warsaw Pact in 1999. That’s a reasonable demand that would greatly enhance strategic security between these nuclear superpowers. Anything less will dangerously retain the risk of war, including by miscalculation.