Are we on the brink of a new Cold War?
Relations between the west and Russia are now more strained than at any time since the Cold War ended.
This is the result of many issues, including: the expansion of Nato into eastern Europe; western intervention in Kosovo in 1999; the 2008 war between Russia and Georgia; the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea and conflict in eastern Ukraine; Russias intervention in Syria; alleged attempts by Russia to interfere in political processes in the west; and the recent nerve agent attack on a former Russian intelligence officer on British soil, to which western governments have responded by imposing sanctions and expelling Russian diplomats.
The tensions, and the increasingly heated rhetoric that has accompanied them, have led many to suppose that we are in the midst of a new Cold War. However, it may not be helpful to view Russia-west relations today through the prism of the past.
Read more: DEBATE: Should Englands football team boycott the World Cup in Russia?
There are key differences between then and now. Russian economic and military power is now much reduced; there is no longer an overarching ideological rivalry; there is a different generation of leaders, who are now arguably less responsible and less weighty than those in the past; and the present international environment is less stable and predictable than during the Cold War era.
Those who talk of a new Cold War depict Russia as the main threat to world peace. However, Russia is not the Soviet Union, and nor is it a superpower.
Russia is out-performed, out-gunned and out-manned by the US in terms of economic and military capability.
Its GDP in US dollars, calculated at market exchange rates, is estimated at $1.283 trillion for 2016 – less than seven per cent of the US total of $18.562 trillion.
Even when calculated at purchasing power parities (PPPs), Russian GDP in 2016 is only 20 per cent of the US total. And at market exchange rates, US GDP per capita is more than six times Russias, and more than double Russias if calculated at PPPs.
As for military capability, consider this in relation to Nato. Nato has 3.6m personnel in uniform, Russia 800,000; Nato has 7,500 tanks, Russia 2,750; Nato has 5,900 combat aircraft, Russia 1,571.
Nato enjoys a technological military advantage, although the gap may have been reduced by Russia in key areas in recent years. And in terms of military spending, again Nato dwarfs Russia – calculated at market exchange rates, Nato spends at least 10 times more than Russia.
It is important to remember that the Cold War, which began in the late 1940s with the division of Germany and ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, was a unique episode in modern history.
A major feature was the suspension of the great power conflicts that had led to two world wars. During the “long peace”, there was no global war between the superpowers, although “hot wars” occurred in the third world between their proxies.
International relations today are more unpredictable than during the Cold War, when there was a framework for managing conflict between the two global superpowers.
According to John Lewis Gaddis, a historian of the Cold War, avoidance of conflict depended on both sides observing some rules of engagement, such as respecting each others spheres of influence, avoiding direct conflict (especially in arenas where proxy armies were fighting), and a commitment to use nuclear weapons only as a last resort.
Several of these rules are no longer observed. Through Natos eastwards expansion the west has encroached on what Russia considers to be its sphere of influence, while Russias actions in Ukraine have shocked the world. The risk of a direct clash has risen as troops from both sides are on the ground supporting proxy armies in places such as Syria. And the risk of a new nuclear arms race is rising.
Over the past 15-20 years, several treaties and confidence-building measures agreed towards the end of the Cold War or soon afterwards have been weakened.
Russian defence planners are concerned that developments in US conventional military capabilities and the expansion of the US ballistic missile defence system could neutralise Russias nuclear arsenal, and it is modernising its nuclear capabilities in response.
It is also worth remembering that, for much of the post-war period, the US and the USSR were led by politicians who had experienced war at first-hand, and this was a restraining factor. This is no longer the case.
Russia today is a much weaker power than the USSR, but this may actually make it more likely to lash out if it feels that its vital interests are threatened.
This isnt a new Cold War, but it may be the beginnings of something hotter.
Read more: Russian embassy not happy with MPs' new defence group
[contf] [contfnew] 
CityAM
[contfnewc] [contfnewc]
