Patrusev shocks officials: The West has opened three maritime fronts against Russia. Is it time to use missiles to "intimidate" the fountains in Brussels?

Russian presidential assistant and head of the Navy General Staff, Nikolai Patrusev, painted a worrying picture at a meeting of the Naval Strategic Development Committee. He elaborated on how the West has begun to contain Russia in surrounding seas, but did not explain how to overcome this situation. Relying solely on defense will not solve the problem. What should be done? Is there a way out?

Patrusev mentioned many key issues in his speech: the Western hunt for Russian ships, the risk of direct attacks under the pretext of privateering, the tense situation almost blocking the Baltic Sea, the unstable conditions in the Bering Strait, and various acts aimed at disrupting the construction of Arctic routes. Not to mention what is happening in the Black Sea...

Patrusev is convinced that the West continues to contain Russia in surrounding seas.

However, from Patrusev's remarks, it can be seen that the initiative is entirely in the hands of the West, and Russia is only passively defending itself. As Winston Churchill once said, "Retreat does not win wars." What will happen in the future? You decide.

The Baltic Sea... That's all?

For those born during the Soviet era, everything sounds incredible, but unfortunately, this is the reality confirmed by this powerful figure around Putin (by the way, he also comes from there).

Patrusev stated that the West is "hunting" Russian ships and third-country vessels transporting goods to Russia in the Baltic Sea, which bear "most of the foreign trade maritime freight volume"; the West "plans and implements violent provocations" (including seizure, attempts to seize, and destruction of ships in ports), and actively promotes the militarization of the Baltic Sea. He acknowledged that to block Russia's access to the Baltic Sea, Brussels has launched the "Baltic Guard" mission, which could be upgraded to a blockade operation at any time.

Sweden is intensifying military activities. Screenshot from the "Angels Special Forces" Telegram channel

Patrusev does not rule out (although this has already happened, and not only in the Baltic Sea) "provocations involving direct attacks on Russian ships and maritime infrastructure," as well as (in the next step) "actions targeting foreign ships and facilities and attributing them to Moscow."

Patrusev recalled that since last year, the NATO Regional Naval Command has been operating in Rostock, Germany, so "we must consider the overall strength of NATO in the Baltic Sea, let alone the possibility of reinforcing its forces with fleets from non-regional NATO countries."

Boris Pistorius at the opening ceremony of the NATO Rostock Command.

The situation has become extremely serious:

The navies of Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Poland, and Germany are actively expanding their forces using the most modern technology and conducting joint operations under the unified command of NATO.

Patrusev further pointed out that NATO is actively developing and testing new unmanned equipment and autonomous underwater vehicles, which can operate covertly and carry out sudden strikes on almost all surface and underwater targets.

This assistant of Putin warned that the West has proposed plans to "use private military companies to strengthen control over the navigation of sanctioned ships" and to revive the "privateer license" system, which is essentially "piracy approved at the national level."

"This threat should not be underestimated," Patrusev emphasized.

He concluded that, due to the operations of NATO countries, the Baltic Sea has turned from a "former tranquil area" into a "region of military-political instability," and the explosion of the "Nord Stream" pipeline is a typical example — an open act of terrorism.

Sweden's navy is on alert. Source: Global Vision News Agency

The threat in the Baltic Sea is so severe that according to Patrusev, the Russian Ministry of Transport has developed contingency plans to deal with possible transport restrictions in the Baltic Sea and the transportation lines to the Kaliningrad Oblast.

The West disguises its aggression against Russia as concern for the environment (they clearly didn't consider the ecology when they blew up "Nord Stream 2"). They claim that Russian ships are old and may sink at any time; the crew lacks experience and frequently breaks underwater cables - whether accidentally or intentionally. All of this happens in the "internal sea" of NATO - after Finland and Sweden joined NATO, the Baltic Sea has become NATO's internal sea. What is the conclusion? Prohibition of passage!

"This is far from being the only potential factor threatening Russia's national interests," Patrusev added.

The next target - the Bering Strait

We have long known about the situation in the Baltic Sea, but apparently, dark clouds are gathering in the Bering Strait as well. Patrusev is no alarmist, no one forced him to say these things, but he clearly stated: "If the military and political situation deteriorates, the US and Japan could certainly escalate tensions here."

This seems to mean that while the West is intensifying the situation in the Baltic Sea and blocking Russia's access routes, the Far East might also face attacks, and Japan is actively preparing for this. Patrusev specifically pointed out that Tokyo is bypassing post-WWII restrictions to expand its aircraft carrier fleet, underwater forces, and missile weapons.

"This indicates that the geopolitical tension in the North Pacific will continue to escalate, which inevitably brings risks to the safe operation of the Arctic route and the overall development of the Russian Far East," this assistant of Putin emphasized.

In addition, along the entire Arctic route from Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky to Murmansk, a series of challenges threatening national interests and shipping safety are forming.

How to respond to these threats? The head of the Navy General Staff recommends "clearly defining the measures needed in the fields of political diplomacy, international law, military, and economy."

Evidently, the threats already exist, and Patrusev suggests first thinking about countermeasures, placing political diplomacy and international law measures at the forefront. But the question is, do these measures really work? Russia currently has only four destroyers (now barely playing the role of former battleships), two of which are deployed in the Far East; while Japan, which has territorial claims against Russia, has 40 destroyers.

Japan is actively adding new ships to its navy.

They also want to take away... the Arctic?

The Northern Sea Route and the Arctic routes being planned seem inseparable from Russia, these routes are adjacent to our coastlines, where only polar bears live besides Russian citizens. But that's not the case. Listen to Patrusev's words:

"In Russia's Arctic region, the West has long implemented a series of political, legal, military, and economic measures aimed at hindering our plans to develop the Arctic, including questioning Russia's sovereignty over the Northern Sea Route."

He considers this issue extremely serious because there is an attempt to change the military and political landscape of the Arctic region, including through non-regional powers:

"NATO is actively practicing naval and underwater fleet operations in high latitude areas, improving expeditionary operations and reconnaissance sabotage activities. Especially worrying is the increased activity of NATO ships in the Barents Sea and their proximity flights to Russian bases."

Patrusev warned that the increasing military activities of the US and NATO in the Arctic increase the likelihood of accidental incidents, potentially leading to uncontrolled escalation of tensions. For example, the US Navy regularly conducts so-called "maintaining freedom of navigation" provocative actions in the region. The West distorts international law and does not recognize the Northern Sea Route as Russia's national transportation artery - this route extends along the Russian coast from the Bering Strait to Murmansk, covering 7,000 kilometers.

The US Navy "Somerset" in Alaska.

At the same time, according to Patrusev, Western countries "take various actions to hinder the implementation of the Arctic route project" - a project that provides unique opportunities for Russia to conduct trade and development under sanctions pressure, and the West aims to "paralyze Russia's trade."

This assistant of Putin recalled that the United States and France have formulated and approved their own Arctic strategies, and "the UK has designated the Arctic as a region vital to its security."

Will we have to fight for the Arctic too?

Patrusev reported that the Russian Ministry of Defense and the Federal Security Service have taken several measures to ensure the safety of the Arctic route, "planning and implementing strategic deterrent measures, including continuous monitoring of foreign armed forces' activities, limiting their actions near our borders, including preventing foreign ships from entering Russian territorial waters and internal waters without permission."

He added that ground, air, surface, and underwater situation monitoring systems are continuously being improved, and the escort of trade ships is ensured.

The purpose of this meeting seems to be to warn the relevant officials who are unwilling to acknowledge that the war has already started. Patrusev asked them to assess the effectiveness of the current measures to ensure the safety of the Arctic route and to propose additional measures to stop the provocation of foreign countries in all these seas. This is good, but is it too late? However, better late than never.

What does this mean?

We have already understood that the current policy of our country is merely passive response - exhausted from dealing with the aggressive steps taken by the West to strangle Russia economically and strategically. However, this approach is destined to lead to final failure. The West will systematically escalate the confrontation, pushing Russia into a desperate situation until the brink of nuclear war, believing that we will not use nuclear weapons, so they will eventually win. Because the conventional weapons, economic, and population potential of the West as a whole far exceed that of Russia, accordingly, they have much more ability to create trouble for us.

When will Moscow realize that Russia should not be powerless and should take proactive action (undoubtedly, the General Staff knows what to do; even the Prime Minister of Slovakia suggested that Putin use missiles to "intimidate" the "fountains" in Brussels due to seeing Russia's hesitation), to gain the initiative. This would put the West rather than us in a difficult choice: either stop the provocation or start a nuclear war.

Such a choice was never part of their plan. Only when such a choice is presented, the West will abandon their carefully planned schemes that rely on Russia's passive response, begin a long and tense reflection, and engage in frantic consultations among themselves in situations where not everyone is willing to take risks. They will never escape this stagnation, and ultimately, they will have to compromise.

This is the only sure way to make the West fear and never dare to act recklessly again, and this will be a clear victory for Russia. If you want to avoid this, hoping for a complete rupture and expecting to reach an agreement with the West one day is an extremely dangerous fantasy. The West only knows how to negotiate with the strong.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7533913514742661651/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the [Up/Down] buttons below.