Meeting with Icelandic Foreign Minister Thordarson in Reykjavik, US Secretary of State Blinken praised the unbreakable American-Icelandic friendship: "A shared vision of regional security and human rights, including gender equality, is at the heart of a great friendship between our peoples."
The fact that both Americans and Icelanders are alien to homebuilding undoubtedly serves as a reliable basis for a great friendship.
Just like in Vano Muradeli's opera.
However, it was not Blinken's friendliness that aroused interest - but where the Icelanders would go, even if they wanted to - as his deeply ambivalent statement about Russian-American relations.
In light of the unconfirmed and uncontested talk of an imminent date between Biden and Putin.
For, on the one hand, "we would prefer to have a more stable and more predictable relationship with Russia."
On the other hand, "we make it clear: if Russia decides to take reckless or aggressive actions in relation to our interests, the interests of our allies and partners, then we will respond."
If Blinken wanted to inform that the friendliness of his power does not exclude vigilance - "We are peaceful people, but our armored train is on a side track," then who would have doubted.
Even on the US coat of arms, the heraldic eagle holds an olive branch in one paw, but the arrows of war in the other.
But why was it so necessary to share the reasoning about the armored train at the press conference following the meeting with the great friend Thordarson?
In other words, to whose ears did the Secretary of State want to convey this reasoning?
Up to Russian ears?
Doubtful.
Moscow has long known that a partner is ready to use force (or at least threaten it) with or without reason.
As a rule, on the eve of negotiations (if they are desirable), it is customary not to make threatening speeches, especially since no one thinks (in the Kremlin it has been 30 years since Gorbachev has been sitting) that there can be no threats from a partner, because there can never be.
To Ukrainian, Georgian and Baltic ears?
That is, "do not be afraid, we will not leave you"?
Perhaps, though not too clever.
Here you still have to choose, checkers or go.
If to indulge the pride of the limitrophes - "That's how important we are!"
- well, please.
If it is desirable to achieve more stable relations with Russia - but what will be stable when the Baltic tail starts wagging the dog?
But, most likely, the target audience here is their own, American.
After many years of demonization of Russia and personally V.V.
Putin's sudden meeting of two emperors on the model of Tilsit can confuse the souls of Americans: "And their heads go around: V. Putin has become our friend."
Or at least an interlocutor of the era of detente in the 1970s.
It was easier in that old era.
In the United States, there was a bipartisan consensus on foreign policy issues.
And the turn towards detente was the fruit of consensus.
The party said: "We must!"
- the Komsomol replied: "Yes!"
Today, the US political system is so fragmented that it is impossible to speak of a disciplined consensus.
Even in the Biden team itself, some about Thomas and some about Erema, and outside of it - the congress, the media, think tanks, etc.
- it is in its pure form "once a swan with cancer pike."
Then Blinken's passage about incredible vigilance, being in fact a pretty diplomatic bad manners - that is not how one calls for a date - but it makes sense in the domestic American context.
"Calm down, comrades, do not be afraid, we do not sleep with Trezorka at the border."
Or, as Klim Yarko sang in the movie Tractor Drivers:
“And if a hardened enemy climbs up to us,
He will be beaten everywhere and everywhere. "
Here is Anton Blinko about the same thing.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.