Last summer, Putin chose to clarify the concept of foreign policy of the country. Lavrov yesterday remembered about it and said that the foreign Ministry is working on a “new edition”, and in the basis of the new concept should lie “the shift to polycentric architecture” of international relations. What is the meaning of such documents?
In the current concept, which was approved in February 2013 and set the goals of “building good-neighbourly relations with neighbouring States” and “comprehensive strengthening of international peace” and “create favorable external conditions for sustainable and dynamic growth of the economy.” In reality, Russian foreign policy was directed strictly against those goals: started a war with Ukraine provoked a confrontation with almost all developed countries, has made Russia the target of sanctions by the world community, has deprived the economy of access to global financial resources, due to sharp decline of investments and the twofold fall of the ruble has received a significant economic downturn… it Turns out that one of the MFA concept has already been successfully implemented and has now launched “the shift to polycentric architecture”, right?
What do you call this “polycentric architecture”? And this is when Russia believes that she, along with Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Pakistan (countries of the SCO) have created a “pole of power” by combining modes, which have common only that they all reject the modern politics of liberty, democracy, human rights and all the forces are opposed by the EU and the US.
Polycentric in Russian understanding is when, for example, torture is prohibited, but permitted in us; there is the right to life has a value, but here there is none; there to lie in politics is bad, and we have normal matter and so on. Here it is — “multipolarity”! Here they are — the country-the heroes who finally put Americans and Europeans a dominant position in the world and forced to reckon with Russia!
Actually all this “polycentric architecture” is all empty. Unlike the USSR, Russia no pole is not, as she doesn’t have “super idea” to replace the bankrupt Soviet, there is no particular philosophy or ideology of the leadership, no strategy (national or global) nor the practice of its implementation. There are weak provincial authoritarian nationalist system of semi-criminal type, existing on the money from the sale of raw materials.
Trying to come up with some new “polycentric” foreign policy concept instead of catching up to do, to move from simulation to real development means a further consolidation of the countries on the periphery of global development and its isolation.
