Prof. Mearsheimer: How Dangerous is Russia to America? to the World?

von kennerderlage

 

 

Wie immer ein interessantes Interview mit Prof. John Mearsheimer, das Col.Lt. (ret.) Daniel Davis gestern hielt:

 

 

Zusammenfassung unter dem Video:

 

John Mearsheimer argues that modern warfare requires smart, well-educated soldiers at every level, which historically benefited countries like Prussia/Germany. Today, however, Russia under Putin is less focused on general education and more on preparing society for a prolonged, militarized confrontation with the West. He predicts the Ukraine war will end not with a decisive victory but with a frozen conflict—a long, hostile stalemate marked by “poisonous” relations between Russia and the West, numerous potential flashpoints, and ongoing low-level conflict in occupied and adjacent regions. 

 

Russia is preparing its population for this enduring struggle by expanding patriotic and military-oriented education from a young age. The speaker calls the West’s attempt to bring Ukraine into NATO a major strategic mistake that triggered this long-term crisis. 

 

He emphasizes that Russia is not a “paper tiger”: its military today is stronger than in 2022, and it could overpower any European army (though not easily the U.S.). Russia views the West as a mortal threat intent on weakening or destroying it, and Putin—distrusting both Trump and European leaders—is planning for worst-case scenarios. 

 

At the strategic level, Russia continues advancing its nuclear and missile capabilities (Sarmat ICBMs, Avangard systems, hypersonics, Poseidon underwater drones, etc.) to ensure it can deter or retaliate against any U.S. nuclear strike. Putin signals clearly that Russia will maintain a credible second-strike capability and prevent the U.S. from gaining an advantage. 

 

On nuclear testing, Trump publicly suggested the U.S. might resume nuclear detonations after Russia tested systems involving nuclear propulsion. The speaker explains Trump misunderstood the tests: Russia was not testing nuclear warheads. He argues the U.S. has no practical need to conduct nuclear explosion tests, since modern reliability can be verified without them.