В МИД-е что то взорвалось. Или сдохло

Я от неожиданности чуть горячим чаем самое ценное себе не облил.
На WAR ON THE ROCKS выложили отличную статью Максима Сучкова, и.о. директора Института международных исследований МГИМО МИД России, предельно четко разъясняющую американскому (да и не только американскому) околовоенному сообществу позицию России в политическом кризисе последних лет.

Поздравим подчиненных Сергея Викторовича с открытием для себя и началом работы с по настоящему уважаемой профессиональной прессой, а не, прости господи, желтушным The National Interest и ему подобными ресурсами.

WHAT IS RUSSIA’S LOGIC FOR THE CURRENT CRISIS?
MAXIM A. SUCHKOV JANUARY 7, 2022



U.S.-Russian relations may no longer be central to world politics, the way they used to be during the Cold War, but when it comes to strategic stability and security in Europe and Eurasia, there is still no more important bilateral relationship in the world. President Vladimir Putin’s demands for “security guarantees” from the United States and NATO have caught many, including in Moscow, by surprise. The urgency with which Moscow seeks to have its proposals addressed — presented not as a “menu of options” to choose from but a “package” — has been even more stunning. This swift and somewhat bewildering presentation by Moscow should not be read as a bluff or as yet another attempt to simply get the attention of the United States. Putin may not exactly know what he wants, but he surely knows what he doesn’t want: over the course of his almost 20-year rule, this is his third major call to negotiate more favorable security conditions for Russia. Two previous attempts ended in wars. This time Moscow feels may be different, primarily because of the changing focus of the United States from Europe to Asia, and a U.S. interest in “a stable, predictable relationship” with Russia. In other words, there’s a sense in Moscow that Washington is looking for changes to the European security architecture so that it can focus on the Indo-Pacific. And if that is the case, Russia can be part of the solution if the United States agrees to the Kremlin’s proposals, or become an even bigger problem if the United States rejects them. The military build-up around Ukraine that unfolded before the proposals were formally rolled out appears to have signaled Russia’s determination to have frank, direct, and prompt discussions with the United States. Putin’s virtual “ultimatum” thus breaks into two closely intertwined subject matters: the Kremlin’s hopes to change Washington’s approach to the European security order and Russia’s intentions for Ukraine. Moscow is likely to make decisions regarding the second track depending on the progress on the first one — or lack thereof. Invading Ukraine was — and still is — not Putin’s preferred option to bring Washington to the table, but it took such a threat to get the White House to take his agenda seriously. This, however, seems to be only the first part of the plan. Should the talks with the United States fail to deliver satisfactory results for Moscow, the “military and military-technical response” that the Russian leadership mentioned may indeed directly concern Ukraine. This doesn’t necessarily imply a direct military invasion but may include a range of other options such as, for instance, missile deployments in Donbass, Crimea, or elsewhere. In addition, Russian officials also promised to embark on the course of “creating vulnerabilities” for Western countries. ...