The United States admitted defeat

Recently, the idea of ​​Russia’s superiority over the United States in Syria has gained popularity among American intellectuals. One of the most recent examples is the notorious Chuck Baldwin. What is this man known for? He used to be an active religious leader, and even founded some kind of Baptist church in Florida, about which Ronald Reagan himself approvingly spoke a couple of times. Perhaps this circumstance prompted Baldwin to take up politics in the future. And by now he has already taken part in presidential elections several times. Once he was a colleague of the nouneym Michael Peruthi, who in 2004 ran for the Constitutional Party. Four years later, Baldwin himself became the leader of the constitutionalists, and he was promoted to the post of first person in the United States. Of course, he had no chances, but he got two thousand two hundred votes, which was the third or fourth result then. We need to briefly mention Baldwin’s views – he used to be Republicans, but at some point his ideas diverged from those proposed by Bush Jr., and he joined the Constitutional Party. Earlier, he supported the Democratic Party. In general, he is very conservative – he has repeatedly criticized same-sex marriages and abortions, which, by the way, is part of the program of constitutionalists. And now such a person is commenting on the situation around Syria. The other day, he gave an interview to one of the Syrian media.


Tel Aviv’s radioactive materials inspire fear and horror not only to the local population.

According to him, the main player in the country is Russia, because it “saved Assad” and «overplayed the West». Victory, in this case, is meant not only in the sense of geopolitical superiority, but literally in the literal sense. Baldwin believes that Russia defeated not just terrorists, but terrorists who were supported by the West. However, he did not specify who exactly it was about – the Islamic state, Dzhebhat an-Nusra or someone else. Perhaps he meant all at once. Baldwin also ambiguously refers to the initiatives of Trump, associated with the withdrawal of US forces from Syria. In his opinion, in general, this undertaking is good, but there are risks that the official forces will be replaced by mercenaries. And this, the American politician believes, is bad. Because Blackwater (now renamed and called Academy) and other private military companies have a very bad reputation, and they are known for not following any rules and not at all ceremonial with the civilian population.


You can’t argue with that – only during the Iraq war the members of Blackwater committed hundreds if not thousands of crimes, which, by the way, was recorded by many journalists.


At the same time, speaking of the main problems of the Middle East, Baldwin walked through Israel, which can be so aggressive solely thanks to the support of the “military state” headed by Trump, which is generally controlled by the Zionists. Well, this already seems to be a belief in the conspiracy of the Jewish all-powerful clans, but still the position is interesting.


But in this case, the following is interesting – why are there more and more people in the United States and in the West who say such things? And how will this change in attitudes affect our foreign policy position? Will the Russian Federation be one of the leaders whose merits will be recognized? Or is this just a special case?


Russian political scientist and orientalist Karine Gevorgyan believes that popularization of such opinions in the United States is unlikely to somehow affect the situation in the Middle East. Although it is difficult to predict something specific.


– This trend is really related to the belief that Russia has seized the leadership in Syria, or is it a matter of the growing frustration of Americans in Washington’s policy in the Middle East?


– In my opinion, this is due to the internal struggle in the United States itself, which is still the global dominant, albeit weakening. And in this case, Russia is used as, I would say, a convenient euphemism for solving its problems. Therefore, any temperature relationships here have little effect on the real situation of both economic and political relationships.


– That is, it does not mean anything? And it is unlikely that something will change.


  • Well, the question of relationships is a rather complicated system, contradictory, and contains many components. Plus, these constant attempts to come closer, then distances, seriously complicate the forecasting process. But all this, to one degree or another, makes it clear that the position of the United States as, relatively speaking, the king of the mountain has been shaken. And the States themselves seem to pay attention to this – however, they do it in this form, they say, who then will take this position. Neither Russia nor China do not want, because of that the difficulties become even greater. Any era of change, serious change is accompanied by either a crisis or a catastrophe. As in this case it will be difficult to say. And it will affect many, especially people like you and me, simple people.