"Rossiya-Matushka" is the transliteration of the Russian phrase Россия-Матушка, which means "Mother Russia." This personification of the Motherland as a goddess (not unlike Invicta, the Goddess of Victory), is deeply embedded in the Russian psyche, and is an oft-heard term among patriotic Russians the world over. I imagine it's heard quite a lot in Crimea these days.
The purpose of this thread is not to rehash the Crimea issue specifically, but rather as a more general discussion of Russia and its place in the world. I happen to have some Russian heritage myself: My paternal grandmother was Russian, originally from Kiev. As the story was told to me, her family were wealthy business owners who fled before the Red Army during the October Revolution. Her mother (my paternal great-grandmother) had the maiden name Romanov, which is intriguing (the Romanovs were the Russian imperial family until they were deposed and executed). Perhaps a touch of Romanov DNA explains my attraction to big furry hats. But I digress. Russia.
Russia's role in the world has changed tremendously during my lifetime. I am just old enough to remember the tail end of the Cold War; I was a teenager when Yeltsin stood on the tanks and the USSR, a monolithic entity that had seemed, from our point of view, vast and eternal, fell apart. It's funny to think now that something which played such a huge part in our lives will eventually be relegated to a footnote in the long recounting of Russian history, but in truth that's really all it is. There's a commentary on our smallness in the grand scheme of things in there somewhere, if anyone cares to look. But I digress again.
After the fall of the Soviet Union Russia went through some tough times. Remember all the stories about ships stuck in port because they had no fuel? Soldiers going years without pay? It was quite a slap in the face to a nation that was once considered one of the world's two mightiest. I won't go into the history in detail here, there are others here (ARAM) who are more qualified to do that. What I will say is that the West, and the United States in particular, had a golden opportunity then to bring Russia into the modern world as a strong and prosperous nation, but instead we let her flounder.
Now here we are, 23 years later, and Russia is stronger than she has been since athletes wore CCCP at the Olympics. Not to the levels she enjoyed in Cold War days, but much stronger than in the '90s. Her military machine is smaller, but it is also more technologically advanced (in relative terms, from what I understand they are still well behind the West) and better equipped. Flush with cash from Russia's vast reserves of natural gas, Vladimir Putin has been able to expand the motherland's influence to encompass most of the former Soviet territories. It's not the ironclad hold of the Soviet military machine, to be sure (although try telling that to Ukraine), but it's a grip that extends, indirectly, into Western Europe by means of the energy reserves, or access to them (via pipelines), that Russia controls. Germany's economy, for example, the biggest in Europe, is deeply intertwined with Russia. Without a single shot being fired, Vladimir Putin has gotten what Soviet leaders could only dream of: an obeisant Germany.
Despite all the dire warning in recent media about a New Cold War, I think a strong Russia is actually a good thing for the United States. Although I do not believe in the kind of isolationism that some people (Thrash comes to mind) favor, neither do I think the United States can police every crisis around the globe. The world is far too big, and regions of instability too widespread, for that. But we do derive a benefit from stability, both as a nation (saving our blood and treasure) and a race (not killing each other is a good thing, after all), and in general I hold to the tenet that "With great power comes great responsibility." As a nation we made a collective decision to build the mightiest military machine the world has ever known; I believe we have a responsibility to use it to do good when and where we can.
I envision a world dominated by five or six major powers: The United States, The European Union, Russia, China, India, and "the Middle East." I put that last one in quotes because obviously it is not a country, nor even an official political entity at all. Perhaps "Islam" would be a better term. Although they do not speak with one voice politically, it is hard to deny that the Islamic world plays a major role in shaping the politics and policy of nations, banks, and major corporations. South America and Africa are up and coming, but hot on the Big Boys' heels, especially Brazil. But I (stop me if you've heard this) digress.
The United States will continue to be the single largest player on the field for quite some time, I think, barring some unforeseen and almost unfathomably disastrous change of fortunes (which, while rare, are not unknown in history). At the risk of sounding like the guy who proclaimed the Titanic unsinkable, such a disaster seems unlikely. Not impossible, mind you. Just unlikely. The others are all more or less balanced, with no one able to overcome another individually, making alliances all the more important. The US is big enough that it could probably overcome any one of the others, but at great cost. Sound like a familiar situation? Heh.
Each of these powers will have their spheres of influence, more or less recognized by the others (although sometimes not officially). Regions of instability that fall within those spheres are the responsibility of the large power. I mean, Jesus, would we have wanted to get involved in Chechnya or South Ossetia? Hard to see the national benefit in that. But instability in Mexico? Or South America? Or the Caribbean? You better believe the United States will see a national interest and intervene; in fact we have done so on many occasions.
If this sounds overly complicated, consider: It is in no major power's interest to go to war with one of the other major powers. The economic damage would be too great. This serves as motivation to use diplomatic/economic solutions whenever possible, and an informal balancing act could evolve into the structures of an eventual world government a la Star Trek. And then we can all wear unitards.
