How does Russia view the West?If you ask Western policy makers about the main security threats facing Europe, they come up with two: Jihadists from the so-called Islamic State and President Vladimir Putin's Russia.
The threat from jihadists is clear. But why Russia?
Western governments argue that by annexing Crimea and fomenting war in eastern Ukraine, Mr Putin not only violated Ukraine's sovereignty, he challenged Europe's borders and showed himself to be a dangerous and unpredictable leader.
They worry what he might do next.
So far a full-blown conflagration has not materialised.
Since the Minsk peace deal in February, it feels as though the Ukraine crisis has settled into an uneasy standoff.
Talks on the future of eastern Ukraine proceed with little progress. The ceasefire is being breached by both sides, leading to daily casualties.
Though Moscow denies it, Russian military involvement in rebel areas is widely reported and its soldiers have been captured. Western sanctions remain in place. Russia's relations with the West have soured on many fronts.
But there isn't actually a full-scale war going on.
So what should we expect next?
Assessing that is difficult. One reason Western planners are so nervous is because they are unsure how to read Russian intentions.
Reassuring and alarming
So recent comments by Lt Gen Evgeny Buzhinsky, one of Russia's most senior international military negotiators until he retired in 2009, may be helpful.
His long career in the Soviet and then Russian armed forces gave him a frontline role going back to the chilliest years of the Cold War. Now head of the PIR Centre, a prominent military think-tank in Moscow, he is in close contact with his former colleagues on the General Staff and in the Defence Ministry.
His assessment of where we stand is both reassuring and alarming. He rejects the idea of a potential Russian attack on the Baltic states as irrational. No doubt Baltic governments would be wary of taking that at face value.
But it is still interesting to hear a top Russian general argue that it would be foolhardy to attack a country protected by Nato. It suggests the Alliance's Article Five does act as a deterrent - even if some Nato publics seem lukewarm about the idea of coming to other countries' aid.
Gen Buzhinsky also thinks the risk of direct confrontation between Russia and the West has lessened in recent months in part, perhaps, because of the Minsk peace deal.
But he also identifies a shift in Russia's reading of US President Barack Obama's attitude towards arming Ukraine.
"If you supply weapons, then you have to send instructors, and it is a fairy tale that they can be somewhere in western Ukraine training Ukrainians, who then take the weapons and go east," says Gen Buzhinsky.
"Instructors should be on the front line. And if so, there should be casualties, losses, hostages and prisoners. And that would mean direct involvement of the US in the conflict.
"To my mind that is the reason why Obama is so unwilling to send lethal weapons."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33821589
