How credible are the Spanish disclosures of classified US and Russian documents?
The threat to Russia in the documents is a big source of suspicion. Recently, Spanish media published what they claimed was a secret written reply from the United States to Russia.The written response was based on what was billed as an official US response to The Russian side regarding the recent resolution of the Ukraine situation.The response has been kept strictly secret, and only part of it has been made public in Russia.The document is precious in its secrecy.But the Spanish press suddenly began to decipher it, raising suspicions at the bottom of the heart.Madrid, Spain: La Chata, Spanish for apartment could this document be real?Even if some of it is true, how much is it credible?The credibility of Spanish media is not discussed here, and there are doubts about the public content only.The first is the U.S. commitment to Russia, which reads, The United States is willing to discuss both sides……A reciprocal commitment to avoid deployment on Ukrainian territory……A permanent force carrying out combat missions “.The words “permanent force” send a shiver down one’s spine.If Russia and the United States cannot agree on Ukraine, the United States will deploy permanent troops inside Ukraine.Is such hyperbole possible?Surely it’s impossible!2022-2-4, the first American troops to be sent to Germany in response to the Ukraine crisis arrive in Germany. Despite the fact that Ukraine is not yet a member of NATO, even if it were, It would probably not accept the permanent presence of American troops in the country.For example, Japan, which hosts a large number of U.S. military bases in Japan, will need to provide more than 200 billion yen annually for the U.S. forces stationed in Japan starting in 2022.The total cost for the five years from 2022 is 1.055 trillion yen.The cost-sharing plan is renewed every five years and is expected to increase after five years!Will Ukraine be able to pay for such a huge amount of military spending when it is impossible for the U.S. military to pay for it all on its own?The answer is clearly no.It is hard to say whether Ukraine, whose economic strength is very different from That of Japan, will go bankrupt due to its huge military expenditure.Okinawa, Japan, U.S. troops in Japan and it is unlikely that the U.S. military will maintain a similar presence in Ukraine as it has in Japan.Japan has a long-standing alliance with the United States, which historically it has seen as its sole backer, and its status as a defeated world War II power that makes it uncomfortable to accept a permanent U.S. military presence.Ukraine and the United States do not have such a close historical tradition.Ukraine, for its part, simply wants the economic benefits of joining NATO.The closeness with the United States will quickly decline if there are no real benefits or if there are real benefits.So the “permanent force” is just a megalomaniacal threat that seems unlikely to make it into the official response.Kiev, Ukraina-Putin’s recent tough talk has raised the possibility of a threat in the document. But like his written response, Putin also spoke out at a recent news conference.At a recent press conference, Putin mentioned Russia’s three key principles.One of them reads: “NATO’s military infrastructure in Europe will be restored to the state it was in when Russia and NATO signed the basic relations document in 1997.”Simply put, NATO’s military infrastructure in Europe will have to be the same as it was in 1997.Is it possible in France in 1997?That’s not possible either.About half of NATO’s 14 members have joined since 1997.Today, NATO has 30 members.In addition, 1997 is a very important time point.That was the year NATO began formally admitting new members after the collapse of the Soviet Union.What Mr Putin means, therefore, is not only that NATO cannot now expand eastward, but that it must overturn all that has been built over the past two decades.And the results of these two decades are infinitely close to half of all NATO’s achievements in military infrastructure today!NATO is clearly not going to accept such a request.If it does, it will mean a return to the cold War.A bipolar world may well be coming back!But it makes the written response published by Spain all the more credible.Just think, why putin in public so “lion big mouth”?Such a rhetorical tone is likely due to the fact that the administration’s written response happened to include something with a stick.Russia has long been known to demand a ban on NATO expansion.To put it bluntly, Ukraine is not allowed to join NATO.If there is any talk of a “permanent force,” the U.S. would not only admit Ukraine into NATO, but also cultivate Ukraine as its confidant.Russian President vladimir Putin: This level of assertiveness is the same as Putin’s demand that NATO “cut itself off”.So the consistency of attitude adds credibility to the written response.Of course, no one can say whether the document is real or not.American and Russian officials say they did not leak, but each suggests the other did.The truth is so murky that it will be years before the documents are declassified.There is, of course, another possibility.Didn’t Russia earlier announce that it would release the core of the document to its own people?Maybe the Spanish got in and sent the decryption back to Spain.The Spanish media added to the hype and published it as a whole.Sullivan, U.S. AMBASSADOR to Russia: Holding a document