For those who want to understand the main directions of foreign policy of the Kremlin in the foreseeable future, is to carefully read the new report from the Valdai club.
The theme of the XVIth annual meeting of the international discussion club “Valdai”, which takes place these days in Sochi marked its organizers bluntly: “dawn of the East and the global political system”. If someone misunderstood something, then the club should be more detailed explanation: “At the forefront of questions about the Eastern influence on the global order is changing the world in which the growing role of Asia, and different from the Western worldview and the structure in the forefront.
The tone of the discussion on this traditional Pro-Kremlin event, which, as you know, loves to speak and the President of Russia Vladimir Putin, of course set the main report, published on the same website. Given the status of the event, it is clear that the participants and especially the authors of the installation report, guided by the views of the main person in the Russian Federation. Accordingly, if you want to understand the basic policies of the Kremlin (especially external) in the foreseeable future, you should carefully read this document.
Name it as the theme of the entire Valdai event sample fall 2019, also speaks for itself: “Time to grow up, or justification of anarchy. As the absence of the world order can contribute to the responsible behavior of States”.
Just need to mention that “Valdai” understanding “anarchy” to anarchy, as the idea of absolute human freedom, based on the negation of private property and the state with its apparatus of violence, is irrelevant. The speech in the report is, of course, this isn’t anarchy, which, incidentally, is one of the areas of socialist and Communist ideas. No, of course. Just for the Kremlin wise men, the words “anarchy” and “chaos” are synonyms.
Here are some of the main points of the Valdai report.
“A more natural state of international relations is anarchy, and the relative order of the twentieth century was the result of the specific circumstances of the period. These circumstances are no more.”
….”The second half of XX and beginning of XXI century can hardly be regarded as a model for the future. Rather, the time will go down in history of international relations as a period of anomalous order”.
Here we see another example of when the interpretation of historical facts to please people in authority, is more important than the facts themselves. But if it is about what angle “should be considered” “the second half of the twentieth and beginning of the XXI century”, you have to remember the saying of one wise man — that so far we have dealt rather with the history of humanity than with its history, because it is not so far beyond their own animal nature. Maybe the end of XX and beginning of XXI century should be considered just as the era of maximum approach of mankind to his true human history?
However, this view of the authors of the report obviously is not split. They just have other problems…
Because they focus not on facts, but on the setup coming from the Kremlin, they inevitably start to dream, and so that to distinguish where the end of the flight interpretation and starts outright distortion of the facts, the inexperienced reader is almost impossible. The last statement is illustrated in this thesis: “the Idea of the relativity of sovereignty, which was the product of a “liberal order” at the stage of gaining the hegemony, turned into the idea of the absoluteness of power.”
“We recognize the impossibility of creating a world management, not based on the strength of some powers group/powers, and rely on the instinct of self-preservation of States”.
Great thesis — Hello, stone age!
“To replace the built world order comes democracy independent States, dictating new requirements for responsible conduct” (“democracy of independent States” — almost a direct borrowing from Surkov “sovereign democracy”).
Copyright these people let themselves dealt with, we turn our attention to what we are talking about a “democracy”, which was acknowledged as such only in this specific, in fact, not usually very democratic state.
“The new world is much more democratic than his predecessor”continue your song, the authors of the report, clearly enjoying this “new world”. The question of what this new world is more democratic than the old one, and the answer is, of course, is no.
“But that’s why it opens a huge opportunity for the maturation of humanity as a society of independent individuals — States”.
That is, humanity as a collection of human individuals in this wonderful new world just disappears. Each individual unique person is gone. Accordingly, no rights of these individuals. And what is there? There is only States and their visual embodiment of their rulers. They have all the rights. But seven billion people on Earth — so, worker ants, who need the wise rule of the life of the leader.
Analysis of what constitutes the state of the Valdai sages, for obvious reasons, do not. Just quoting themselves, citing last year’s Valdai report. In it, they call the state “social organizations of the highest order”. That is, any state, whether it is the most cannibalistic (including in the truest sense of the word), in their opinion, is “the social organization of the highest order”.
It turns out that the Kampuchea times of Pol Pot, and Stalin’s Soviet Union and Hitler’s Germany — it’s all “higher order”. From which naturally follows that people living in these States people should not even think about overthrowing their rulers, embodying these “organization of the highest order”
However, this is not new. The idea of the state as the Supreme goal, value and meaning for the existence of millions of its citizens were already the core idea of a number of dictatorial regimes of the XX century, the rulers of which also believed their state “organizations of a higher order”.
A characteristic feature of the report is the endless use of the phrase “international order”. And this is no accident. It is well known that right-wing conservative forces, sometimes referred to as a fascist, always appear in the political arena in the form of the “party of order”. Let me remind you that conservatism and traditionalism — the most important components of the ideology of the ruling class of modern Russia. In this regard, it is not surprising that the report is written in the development of this ideology, using the appropriate terminology. It is not about freedom and democracy, not on the rights of the people, but about “handling” or “intractability”, “right” or “anarchy” in international relations of “sovereign” States. About.
In fairness it should be noted that simultaneously with endless references to “new order”, the authors of the Valdai report-2019 talking about “new requirements for responsible conduct” “the decision makers”, not noticing that they contradict themselves.
On the one hand, they sing the national egoism of the “sovereign” States, each of which (and, in fact, of course, their rulers) now it shall determine what, who and in what part of the globe is its “national” interest. On the other hand, talking about “new requirements for responsible conduct” “the decision makers”. That is, they strongly want to move to the right, simultaneously moving to the left. Great logic!
What are the “demands of responsible behavior”? What do you mean? Who they will nominate if existing international institutions, in your opinion, or have already been destroyed, or they must be destroyed, and within each state will be set such “democracy” that does not involve any responsibility of “decision makers” because… read above, the state is “the organization of higher order.” Point. Be happy, ant, you are a part of this once and for all established you are not order.
“Concepts such as power, morality, justice” the authors of the report called “basic categories”, which is not surprising, given that the last two — morality and justice — the category of relative. To prove this, the examples are not far to seek. Just a half century ago, Russia was considered quite moral, when a woman in the square were stripped naked and all honest people whipped for the sins of today who do not pull even on the article of the administrative code. Immoral today probably would consider that a politician who would want it back. However, given the degree of degradation of the Russian society and the educational and information policy of the state, which leads to this degradation, to eliminate the medieval traditions anymore.
Justice is also a vague category. In the ancient world was considered a fair relationship of a slave and his master, and today non-economic coercion to labour is considered unfair and is prohibited everywhere. In medieval Europe, and Russia until the abolition of serfdom in the past, just and moral was considered, for example, the right of the first night. Today, in developed countries something like that is called harassment, is condemned by public morality and punishable by law.
It turns out that from “basic” categories, there is only the force. She from time to time does not change. Moreover, if we are talking about power not as a physical concept (the product of mass and acceleration), or household (the ability to lift heavy objects) and as a tool of international relations, here, over time, changing only the scale. If in the ancient world or the middle ages in such cases it was “about groups of armed men”, now, in General, the same. Only these units are much more mobile than before and are armed not with bows, arrows and swords, and weapons far more destructive.
The authors of the Valdai report miraculously return mankind in primitive times. The only difference is that instead of the stone axe is the main argument of the rulers “organizations of a higher order” is a weapon of mass destruction. Hello, new old world…
And that’s what we must add. Undoubtedly, the argument of the “Valdai wise men” will appreciate not only the Russian government, but the rulers of the countries of “dawn of the East”. The dictates from a position of strength, without any restrictions in the form of international treaties is something that they can really like and be useful in the future. Valdai sages is also aware of this. As well as the fact that Russia, with its constantly shrinking like shagreen leather economy for the same China and India can not keep up, but Europe and the U.S. they hate due to the fact that those who claim to follow at least some rules of human and inter-state coexistence. Realizing this, the authors of the Valdai report put forward the theory of chaos.
“However, historical experience suggests that the more natural state of international relations is anarchy, and the relative order of the twentieth century was the result of the specific circumstances of the period. He was unjust in its basis, as they reflected the realities of the cold war, but to the greatest degree approaching for optimal handling”. Repeat, “anarchy”, in the understanding of the authors of the report — a synonym for “chaos.”
Of course, no one in their right mind would argue that the dictates of the victors of the Second world war, expressed in the veto of the five permanent members of the UN security Council, is an ideal system of international relations. This veto — the embodiment of might is right. It is especially offensive that was introduced largely against Germany and Japan, recognized by the international community guilty of the outbreak of the Second world war. However, until now, 74 years after its end, these countries infringed their rights to self-defence. And this despite the fact that all war criminals of that time, or punished, or has died a natural death, and these countries for many years are an example of democratic and law-governed States with highly developed economies and peace-loving policy.
However, speaking about the injustice of the postwar, the authors present the Valdai report does not propose to make it more fair — for example, to enter in the composition of the permanent members of the UN the same Germany, Japan and a number of other large States of the modern world. No — it is from their side of the question. As a solution to problems of injustice they suggest “anarchy”, which is interpreted as the world, where each state in itself and acts without any internationally recognized limits. However, knowing that Russia, with its two percent of world GDP in such a world, shines only the role of a third-rate power, they put forward the idea of “anarchy.” More precisely, the “chaos”. They do not add to the “controlled chaos” because it would be too ugly, because the “controlled chaos”, this is exactly what their Kremlin patrons, until recently, constantly reproached the West.
“Non-interference in internal Affairs — just words and not the norm of behavior. The principle of sovereign equality is increasingly becoming a formal theoretical scheme. Achieving the benefits of power and the refusal of any constraints — why not? Rules were broken before. But… those who violate them, it is understood and believed such actions are extraordinary, internally. Now the same happens just as necessary. The idea of the relativity of sovereignty, which was the product of a “liberal order” at the stage of gaining the hegemony, turned into the idea of the absoluteness of power.”
Here the authors of the report, of course, intends to throw everything in one pile. On the one hand, ideas of the modern Western world that human rights and freedom above the rights of “sovereign States” (and in fact, their rulers) to violate the rights and freedoms of their fellow citizens. On the other, blatant violation of international treaties the same “sovereign” rulers of the States that we’ve seen over the last five years. Not to mention the fact that the latter is done solely for the sake of ensuring their ability to remain in power in their country forever, not developing it, and living only by explicit or poorly disguised robbery as his people and the peoples of other States.
Of course, the “liberal order” to blame it on the entry of US troops and their NATO allies in Afghanistan or Iraq. However, let’s not confuse warm with soft. It’s one thing to destroy a medieval theocratic regime (by the way, absolutely illegitimate, for that matter), which cannot be place in the modern civilized world, or destroy the life of a dictator, and quite another thing to put aside your own contract with a neighboring democratic country that guarantees its territorial integrity.
The words of the authors of the discussed report that “the idea of the relativity of sovereignty, which was the product of a “liberal order” at the stage of gaining the hegemony, turned into the idea of absolute power”, just an example of blatant manipulation of the facts. Where was the “absolute power of the liberal order” in the events of August 2008 in South Ossetia? Where was she in 2014-2015, and to this day, in the Ukrainian events? “Liberal order” only wondimu hands about the use of “absolute power” one peace-loving country that does not hesitate, threatened and threatens him with nuclear weapons.
© 2019, paradox. All rights reserved.