Brave New World
Our special operation in Ukraine, in my opinion, absolutely forced, caused a real hysteria and completely inadequate reaction in Europe and the USA. Sometimes one even gets the impression that Europe is partially ready to sacrifice the most precious thing it has – its well-being, just to hinder Russia. And, of course, the United States is ready without hesitation to sacrifice both the well-being of Europe and the last Ukrainian soldier for this.
According to the old memory, the USA and the European Union put forward various demands and ultimatums to Russia on behalf of the world community, which they have not represented for a long time, and, in fact, they never represented. In this regard, the tweet of the Chinese Foreign Ministry was very indicative, which presented a map of the world without those countries that do not participate in the anti-Russian hysteria. Lonely islands of the United States and their satellites by no means pulled on this map to the “whole world”.
Unfortunately, the real world community, which is located outside the United States and Western Europe, cannot be surprised by local conflicts, including relatively recent and very bloody ones – for example, more than 700 people died in the Iran-Iraq conflict in the 80s of the last century. 000 people, the war in Rwanda between the Hutu and Tutsi peoples in the 90s claimed the lives of more than a million people. The Turks are fighting the Kurds, Saudi Arabia is fighting the Houthis, the number of victims in Afghanistan after the Americans were there is generally difficult to calculate. Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, Israel and Palestine – the list is quite sufficient to fill the entire article with them alone. Therefore, we can say that the whole world, at least most of it, is watching our special operation in Ukraine with explicit or implicit sympathy, since a huge number of countries and peoples in the world have grievances and claims against the United States and Western European countries, which, by historical standards, quite recently, in some cases until the middle of the 20th century, they were real, official colonialists, and neo-colonial, completely unceremonious manners have been preserved to this day. And the real world community has not forgotten either the morals of the colonialists, or how much one can trust their speeches.
After the destruction of the USSR, some politicians got the impression that there was only one force left in the world, which now can not be taken into account with anyone, and international law is not only completely dead, but has fallen into some kind of suspended animation until better times, and only the right of the strong. This was especially clearly seen in the example of our country, primarily in the issue of NATO's advance to the east and the whole chain of “orange” coups in the zone of our vital interests – the territory of the former USSR, Eastern Europe, a number of Asian countries, in general, along the perimeter of our borders. Moreover, neither the expansion of NATO, nor the “orange” coups had any real need, and they took place according to the principles “I am the boss here” and “there are two opinions – one is mine and the other is wrong.”
From where we left, they came there – Eastern Europe, Afghanistan and even the territories of the former USSR, which quickly became “independent states” in 1991 and were just as quickly recognized as such by the countries of the West. And finally it came to the point that we simply had nowhere to retreat.
But, one way or another, conflicts cannot go on forever. Sooner or later, they end, and you have to consolidate their results, as the Soviet Union did brilliantly after the Second World War, sharply, many times increasing its sphere of influence, and became one of the two pillars of the post-war world order, which lasted until its destruction.
The 20th century was the century of the heyday of international law, since two stable and responsible poles of power appeared in the world – the USSR and the USA, plus the blocs formed by them, which became its guarantors. In fact, all issues on earth were controlled by these two blocks, and each had enough strength to guarantee the destruction of the enemy, so they had to negotiate. At the same time, the difference in ideologies, oddly enough, not only did not restrain, but, on the contrary, only intensified this process, since it was a competition between two powerful Systems that respected each other's strength, and not intraspecific competition, which, as we know from the animal world, the most cruel and disorderly.
I am sure that we will have something similar in the near future, unless, of course, events follow the scenario that no one really wants. I am sure that the conflict in Ukraine will not end with Ukraine alone and will become, and, in fact, has already become, a new page in the struggle against world neo-colonialism. It seems that for the countries of the West it has become a discovery that there are still people living in the world besides them, and they, too, may have vital interests that must be reckoned with. In modern terms, we are waiting for a very significant reformatting of the whole world, all world politics, all norms and rules.
The Earth, as it turned out in the 20th century, is a rather small and rather fragile planet, and living on it in a serious historical perspective is possible only when everyone respects each other and no one tries to behave like an elephant in a china shop. For example, the same Poland can ideologically and politically diverge as far as it likes from us, but at the same time it will not physically become even a meter further from us. Like it or not, you will have to continue to live side by side. And that means you have to negotiate. And create new norms of international law to replace obsolete ones. I am sure that after new political blocs are consolidated in the new amazing world of the future, by analogy with the blocs of the USSR and the USA, these blocs will become guarantors of a new system of international law, in which it will be simply impossible to talk to each other from a position of strength.
This means that new supranational structures will have to be created instead of the same discredited OSCE, which, instead of security and cooperation in Europe, was simply engaged in open pressure and humiliation of our country, where we were constantly reprimanded, as naughty schoolchildren, that we, in their opinion, are not democratic enough. Perhaps in the future, even the appearance of some analogue of the ECtHR, but this is if everything goes very well, and it’s too early to think about it.
But what is important now is that we must behave in these structures in a completely different way, just about the way the Soviet Union behaved. We must take an active part in their creation, actively integrate our rules into them and speak clearly, clearly and loudly about our interests in them. Moreover, we will have to dominate these organizations. After all, such structures are just mechanisms, tools, and the question is how to use them. To give an example, the WTO, and especially its predecessor GATT (General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs), was created as a typical instrument of neo-colonialism, but after a while China became so strong that now it sets the tone and rules there, and even the United States was thinking seriously, especially under Trump, whether to leave this organization.
This is the specificity of international organizations – they only make the strong stronger. As for the weak, until recently they have become weaker in them, although, in my opinion, they also have the right to take into account their interests, which is correct from a strategic perspective.
In any case, Russia definitely should not become isolated in yourself, but quite the opposite. And I am sure that Russia's new role (although the new one in this case is even the still unforgotten old) of Russia will be in great demand in the new world. Time dictates to us the most interesting era of unexpected alliances and sudden historical turns. We have every chance to make up for lost historical time. The end of history, about which the not too far-sighted philosopher Fukuyama wrote, is being postponed seriously and for a long time. There is no way back. Only forward!