Notes

Describe the main elements of a "Cold War" in your own words (do not copy from the textbook or online source).
The main elements would include fear, mutually assured destruction, proxies, and no direct conflict. Russian actions in the past have been in response to western lies and deception. In 2008, the Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili ordered an attack on Russian peacekeepers stationed in South Ossetia permanently by the UN. By Russian constitution, the safety of Russians regardless of location on this planet, is top priority of the President. Russia responded to this agression and the west called this an invasion. Too bad there was no critical thinking and in fact, a FOX news reporter tried to cut off a girl telling the truth in regards to this. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKASUchWf_U) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lptVAbw5oos) What most people don't know is that Mr Saakashvili was held to account for his actions, but dropped his Georgian citizenship to escape prosecution. Georgian authorities inquired with Interpol to place Saakashvilli on the international criminal search list, however Interpol refused. Saakashvili is now in Ukraine and has held political positions there.

In Ukraine, which consists of numerous areas being controlled by neo-nazis, was one of the international problems that started this "cold war". In 2014, the west and mainly the U.S. supported a coup in Ukraine that ousted the democratically elected leader Viktor Yanukovych because he was pro Russia. Everyone hears about Russian aggression but no one heard of a coup that took place there. After he was ousted, Ukraine became lawless in many areas and with the Ukrainian military being unable to be sufficient and Yanukovych being in Russia, he was still legally president under the law. Article 106 Section 17 of the Ukrainian constitution (https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2013/11/08/constitution_14.pdf) explains the military powers that he held and how he had the right to request additional Russian troops to come to Crimea. Contrary to popular belief, Russian troops have been in Crimea for a long time and there was no invasion as the President gave orders for that to have occurred. One thing people also do not realize is the fact that under an agreement signed between Ukraine and the Russian Federation (Харківський пакт), 25,000 troops, 24 artillery systems with a caliber smaller than 100 mm, 132 armored vehicles, and 22 military planes, were legally allowed on Crimean territory. There was no such thing as an invasion but 90% of the public falls for it, especially the ones without the capacity to think and research critically. The west calls that aggression but invading Iraq and killing millions is democracy? Moving NATO troops closer to Russia's border is democracy but Russian troops in Syria at the request of the Presidency of Bashar Al-Assad, who internationally recognized, is bad?

In 2015, after suffering heavy defeats by Daesh*, the internationally recognized Syrian authorities requested Russian assistance and troops have been there since. With Russian firepower, these terror groups were sent to their eternal homes and the war quickly changed in favor of Assad and the Islamic Republic of Iran (ally of the Syrian Arab Republic). America has always opposed Bashar Alssad and has tried to undermine Syrian statehood numerous times but with the Russian military standing behind him, this has halted any regime change initiatives.

In 2016, without any credible proof, Russia was accused of meddling in the election which ultimately tipped the election from Secretary Clinton to then-candidate Trump. This has caused sanctions across the board from both Congress and the President. Russia has also been accused of meddling in Brexit* as well as in elections where right and far right leaders were campaigning and won. This is simply "Russian hysteria" and serves as a scapegoat to hide the failures of leaders and government who lost to people wanting something new.

In 2018, the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal happened in the United Kingdom and was almost immediately blamed on Russian President Vladimir Putin and his government. There has been an American response with sanctions and the expulsion of more than 60 Russians from the country. One of the victims involved was an ex-spy and was considered a traitor by Russian President Vladimir Putin personally. Putin has no mercy for betrayers and he said he would respect an enemy but never a traitor. There are doubts to the story because a military grade weapon would've killed them immediately. Whether the doubts are true or not, it is indisputable that there have been European countries that have produced it. The British government had called Russian diplomats liars who stated that fact. Czech President Milos Zeman admitted that his country did produce the agent although it likely may not have been apart of the attack. As of today, the British government has yet to answer these questions from the Russian government which would help enormously in any investigation to come to a mutual conclusion.
1. Why has Russia been denied the right of consular access to the two Russian citizens, who came to harm on British territory?
2. What specific antidotes and in what form were the victims injected with? How did such antidotes come into the possession of British doctors at the scene of the incident?
3. On what grounds was France involved in technical cooperation in the investigation of the incident, in which Russian citizens were injured?
4. Did the UK notify the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) of France’s involvement in the investigation of the Salisbury incident?
5. What does France have to do with the incident, involving two Russian citizens in the UK?
6. What rules of UK procedural legislation allow for the involvement of a foreign state in an internal investigation?
7. What evidence was handed over to France to be studied and for the investigation to be conducted?
8. Were the French experts present during the sampling of biomaterial from Sergei and Yulia Skripal?
9. Was the study of biomaterials from Sergei and Yulia Skripal conducted by the French experts and, if so, in which specific laboratories?
10. Does the UK have the materials involved in the investigation carried out by France?
11. Have the results of the French investigation been presented to the OPCW Technical Secretariat?
12. Based on what attributes was the alleged “Russian origin” of the substance used in Salisbury established?
13. Does the UK have control samples of the chemical warfare agent, which British representatives refer to as “Novichok”?
14. Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of the same type as “Novichok” (in accordance to British terminology) or its analogues been developed in the UK?

The closest point in recent history to a direct conflict occurred in Syria after President Donald Trump threatened to bomb the Syrian Arab Republic over an alleged chemical attack in terror controlled regions of Syria. This move prompted the Russians to threaten retaliation against ships that take part in any attack that violates the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic. Under international law, it is forbidden to use Sarin gas as it is incredibly toxic to humans. There are many legitimate doubts that it was by the Syrian government. Our State Department falsely mentioned that Russian and Syrian officials have prevented OPCW inspectors from inspecting the area. This is far from the truth as the Syrian government has invited international inspectors in. Why would they do this is they did the attack? There has been proof that there is a cover-up happening at the OPCW with some researchers leaking documents indicating that their opposing views being covered it. (https://journal-neo.org/2019/11/05/syria-opcw-whistleblowers-confirm-what-we-already-knew/)(https://www.rt.com/news/471647-opcw-whistleblower-douma-incident/) (https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kz26m3w-6bo) (https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/w/chemical-attack-evidence-was-manipulated-to-blame-syrian-government-report-claims) The UN has been unable to independently verify the attack. Even a worker in that area that day showed NO signs of poisoning which was completely ignored by the mainstream media. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3ij6yarUUU)
Hassan, the kid featured in the famous video even said himself how much of a farse it was. No western media agencies have attempted to interview any of the victims. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPFaEG9vJT4)
This goes to show how close nations can come to conflict over things that are not independently confirmed. Following the chemical attack, military cooperation between America and Russia halted and the risk escalated for direct conflict.

Regarding the military sector of the Russian Federation, the Russian military has been modernizing at a very fast pace with many weapons being equivalent and or superior in its field.

Over the past few years, the Russian Federation has been consistently demonized and blamed for many problems without sufficient evidence. Actions of the Russian Federation have been in defense of its sovereignty and interests while respecting frameworks of the law. Russia has insisted numerous times and still does insist on resuming dialogue between America. Their actions alone indicate that they may see a potential conflict in the future as the west is quite hostile to the Russian state.

*Daesh (ISIS/ISIL) is an international terrorist group which is banned in Russia.
*Brexit (British exit) was a vote in June 2016 in which the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union.