Gordon Rowe’s Post

5/28/2024, Plainfield, NJ The First Cold War: Anglo-Russian Relations in the 19th Century Hardcover – August 1, 2024 by Barbara Emerson (Author) 391 pages Hurst Publishers $54.99 https://a.co/d/4KMQPdI 0. Prologue Barbara Emerson's "The First Cold War: Anglo-Russian Relations in the 19th Century" is a meticulously researched and insightful exploration of the complex and often adversarial relationship between Britain and Russia during the 19th century. The book offers a fresh perspective on the origins and dynamics of this "first cold war," challenging conventional narratives and shedding light on the enduring tensions between these two great powers. Emerson's central thesis is that the Anglo-Russian rivalry of the 19th century was not merely a clash of imperial ambitions but a deeper ideological and cultural conflict rooted in the contrasting worldviews and political systems of the two nations.[3] She argues that Britain's embrace of liberalism and constitutional monarchy clashed with Russia's autocratic and expansionist tendencies, setting the stage for a prolonged period of mutual suspicion and competition. The book is divided into several sections, each exploring a different facet of the Anglo-Russian relationship: 1. Historical Context: Emerson provides a comprehensive overview of the historical context, tracing the first encounters between Russia and England in the 16th century and the gradual emergence of tensions in the 18th century. 2. The Crimean War: This section offers a detailed analysis of the Crimean War (1853-1856), a pivotal event that crystallized the Anglo-Russian rivalry and set the stage for future conflicts. 3. The Great Game: Emerson delves into the "Great Game," the strategic competition between Britain and Russia for influence in Central Asia, highlighting the complex interplay of geopolitics, espionage, and cultural clashes. 4. Ideological Clash: The book explores the ideological dimensions of the Anglo-Russian conflict, contrasting Britain's embrace of liberalism and constitutionalism with Russia's autocratic and expansionist tendencies. 5. Cultural Perceptions: Emerson examines the cultural perceptions and stereotypes that shaped the views of each nation toward the other, revealing the deep-rooted prejudices and misunderstandings that fueled the conflict. Throughout the book, Emerson draws upon a wealth of primary sources, including diplomatic correspondence, memoirs, and contemporary accounts, providing a rich tapestry of perspectives and insights. Her analysis is nuanced and balanced, acknowledging the complexities and nuances of the Anglo-Russian relationship while also highlighting the enduring tensions and rivalries that defined this "first cold war." #The_First_Cold_War #PlainfieldNJ

In the year 1500, #Europe was a continent marked by shifting alliances, wars, and territorial ambitions. At this time, political borders and control over territories were in flux, influenced by dynastic claims, trade ambitions, religious divisions, and emerging national identities. By 1500, the Ottoman Empire was a formidable power that had been expanding into Europe for over a century. In 1453, the Ottomans captured Constantinople, marking the end of the Byzantine Empire, and had continued pushing into southeastern Europe. This expansion threatened European powers like Hungary, Venice, and Poland, who engaged in frequent conflicts to resist Ottoman advances. The Ottomans would continue to be a dominant force in European affairs for the next several centuries. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth The Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania had formed a personal union in 1386, and by 1500, they were jointly governed. This union created one of the largest states in Europe, stretching from the Baltic to the Black Sea. It was a powerful entity in Eastern Europe, frequently engaged in conflicts with Muscovy (Russia), the Teutonic Knights, and the Ottoman Empire. Teutonic Knights and the Baltic Conflicts The Teutonic Order, which ruled parts of the Baltic region, faced increasing challenges from Poland and Lithuania. After a series of defeats, including the decisive Battle of Grunwald in 1410, the Teutonic Order lost territory and influence. By 1500, Poland was consolidating its influence in the region, weakening the Order and leading to eventual Polish dominance over the area. In Russia, the Grand Duchy of Moscow (Muscovy) was growing in power under Ivan III, who consolidated Russian lands and declared independence from the Mongol-Tatar Golden Horde. By 1500, Muscovy was emerging as a central power in Eastern Europe, setting the stage for future Russian expansion. These conflicts and territorial ambitions shaped the geopolitical landscape of Europe, setting the stage for further wars and alliances that would continue into the 16th and 17th centuries. The map of Europe in January 1500 was thus a snapshot of a continent in transition, with states jockeying for power and territory, a scenario that would contribute to the dramatic transformations of the modern era. #Maps #Russia #Poland #Lithuania #Ottomans

Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te argued that if China's claims on Taiwan were truly about territorial integrity, then China should also aim to reclaim the land ceded to Russia by the Qing dynasty under the Treaty of Aigun in 1858. Lai pointed out that a vast tract of land in what is now Russia's Far East was given to the Russian Empire, yet China does not pursue this territory. He suggested that China's motivation for taking control of Taiwan is less about territorial integrity and more about achieving dominance in the Western Pacific and gaining global hegemony./ #AneverendingsorespotwithRacialOvertones.

The geopolitical complexities of the Russia-Ukraine conflict have highlighted the varied responses of global powers, particularly China and India. Both nations, though differing in approach, navigate the balance between strategic alliances and the conflict’s implications for global order. China, under President Xi Jinping, seeks to mediate with a peace initiative that, while neutral, aligns with Russian interests. This manoeuvre reflects China’s ‘dual use objectives’ of asserting global influence and safeguarding its strategic partnership with Moscow. To read complete article, click here : https://lnkd.in/e3vX3Z3v #Geopolitics #GlobalPowers #India #StrategicAlliances #GlobalOrder #XiJinping #PeaceInitiative

The Western media's portrayal of the recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Astana creates an unnecessary "us-versus-them" dichotomy, overlooking the efforts of post-Soviet states to balance influence in the region. Central Asian states rely on Russia and China for economic prosperity but also seek to be part of the international rules-based order and contribute to global supply chains. Recent democratic reforms in Kazakhstan contrast with the authoritarian image associated with "anti-NATO" countries, and other regional countries have pursued a multi-vector foreign policy. The ongoing SCO event in Astana highlights deeper cooperation among Eastern-centric leaders, and Central Asia's neutral stance in the conflict with Ukraine illustrates the region's nuanced position. The region aims to align with Western and Eastern powers, ultimately serving its best interests. Read further at https://lnkd.in/d6mi_Ehy #centralasia #SCOSummit #multipolarworld #geopolitics #Internationalrelations #BalanceOfPower #RegionalCooperation

What this article i Washington Post does not mention is that the first country on the list of Russian "unfriendly countries" is Czech Republic, USA is second. It is probably not a coecidience that many authoritarians have found Czechs as the most dangerous nation. Whether it was Mr. Hitler, Mr. Charles I of Austria (last emperor of Austrian-Hungarian empire was blaming Czechs for breaking down his monarchy), Lenin (who called Czechs "the biggest thread for the revolution"), or now Putin. Information about the big ones is on front pages of all newspapers around the world every day, and so the small ones know everything about the big ones, but you very rarely find anything about the small ones and that is why the big ones know very little about them. In other words: If you know yourself, but you don't know your enemy you will loose, If you know your enemy, but you don't know yourself you will loose, If you know yourself and you know your enemy you will win. (I wander how many Chinese know Czech authors, philosophers or scholars, but Czechs learn about Chinese history, culture, economy, geography and literature in the schools) The big ones often belive they have some special right to rule the world, but majority is formed by the small ones. https://lnkd.in/ezCDWHkv

Russia, Palestine, and BRICS: Three revolutionary forces changing the world How can the global majority dethrone the American empire? This question was at the center of an elite roundtable discussion between Russian lawmakers and a delegation of foreign intellectuals on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. Here are the main points from that discussion: 🔻Multipolarity is necessary since American hegemony fuels global problems instead of solving them by provoking wars and color revolutions 🔻Russia is a revolutionary power at the forefront of history. The Ukraine conflict is helping break down old unipolar world order and replace it with a more just and equitable system. Russia’s willingness to defy the West is supported by a majority of the world. 🔻Palestine is the litmus test for challenging US imperialism in the Middle East. The conflict has eroded American influence in the Middle East by weakening its main ally in the region, Israel. Palestinian cause is gaining growing support from Global South. 🔻BRICS is overtaking the UN as the premier international organization. The bloc is headed for a major expansion this year under Russia’s chairmanship, with potentially as many as 45 new member states.

At a time when international wars and threats of war seem to hover over so much of the world right now – in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia – it is worth stepping back and understanding why countries like Russia, China, and the United States are protagonists in the existing and potential global conflicts. In this essay of mine (written before the recent conflict between Israel and Hamas), I try to explain, as I see it, the rationales behind and the dangers from pursuits of empire by the three great players on the international stage, especially the costly entanglements resulting from America’s interventionist foreign policy around the world.  https://lnkd.in/ey2PSd-P

Why Peace Remains Elusive on the Korean Peninsula United States Institute of Peace 16 Jul 2024 Reassessing the U.S. Approach to North Korea 70 Years After the 1954 Geneva Conference This year marks the 70th anniversary of the 1954 Geneva Conference, the political conference convened to resolve what the Korean War could not: the division of the Korean Peninsula. The conference failed, however, and since then, there have been no serious diplomatic efforts to achieve peace in Korea. Moreover, the last two years have witnessed profound shifts in the security situation on the Korean Peninsula that further dim the prospects for peace. Given these shifts, there is a need to reassess the U.S. approach to North Korea to escape the constant state of hostility and risk on the peninsula. Among the major shifts impacting the Korean Peninsula are three notable changes in North Korea’s approach to foreign policy: North Korea has withdrawn from its five-decade desire to engage with the United States; North Korea has abandoned its five-decade policy of pursuing peaceful unification with South Korea; and North Korea has signed a comprehensive strategic partnership with its historical ally Russia to oppose the U.S.-led international order. On July 16, USIP hosted a conversation that explores why peace has been elusive on the Korean Peninsula for over seven decades and why the recent shifts in North Korea’s foreign policy indicate that tensions will continue absent a dramatic change in U.S. approach. For more information about this event, please visit: https://lnkd.in/dCfkYa8q... Speakers: Frank Aum, welcoming remarks Senior Expert, Northeast Asia, U.S. Institute of Peace Mark Tokola, panelist Vice President, Korea Economic Institute of America Lieutenant General (retired) Dan Leaf Former Deputy Commander, U.S. Pacific Command

If the People's Republic of #China coercively annexed #Taiwan, #Russia, #Mongolia, and other neighbors would face real questions about their own territorial integrity. Would a CCP leadership imbued with the hubris of successful conquest perhaps be tempted to pursue a greater "People's Empire" with borders more like what the Qing Dynasty controlled 200 years ago? The pink-shaded areas tell a stark and fascinating set of stories. Among them, an area of the Russian Far East 1.5 times the size of Texas was Chinese territory until just before the US Civil War. An online eruption in 2020 reminded us that nationalists in the PRC have not forgotten that for a long time, what we and the Russians know as Vladivostok was known as "Haishenwai" in Chinese. Perhaps most fundamental is this question: What happens to China’s present geostrategic “need” for Russian support if by taking Taiwan, China so severely undercuts the United States that Beijing becomes Asia’s hegemon? What would an isolated, weakened Russia do if it had to confront a PRC whose ambitions were no longer so constrained by US power? I'm not sure that Moscow has really asked itself many of these questions yet. https://lnkd.in/en2ERbFA Chris Bronk Liza Tobin Sergej Sumlenny Christopher Sharman Thomas Henderschedt Igor Khrestin