In the article, Linda Fabian (Fabian Linde) stated that he shared the concern about the escalation of the conflict between Russia and NATO. Well. So we are agreed about what should be the focus. But the further course of his argument is not so proportioned. Making a vain attempt to find logical inconsistencies in my argument, he’s trying to prove that I am “an apologist for the official Russian position”. At this rude insinuation, I do not feel obliged to answer.
Linda ascribes to me the assertion that values are not related to relations of Russia and the West. He is trying to raise my educational level, indicating that the values do in fact have “bongreater solidity and depth than interests.” He is breaking into the open door. The fact that values play a fundamental role in the development of society, so well known that it can be compared with the multiplication table.
I wanted to draw attention to the danger that occurs when politicians take practical steps in full confidence that the citizens should be guided by certain values. If there is a discrepancy between what a society considers important and what society should be considered as such by politicians, you have serious problems. I guess I just have to utter the words “immigration crisis”.
In the case of relations between Russia and the West, this danger manifests itself more clearly. In 1985 in the classic commentary to the Helsinki agreements, the American diplomat George Kennan (George Kennan) warned how dangerous it is to put values at the head of foreign policy. The idea of the existence of universal values is in itself beautiful, but it’s a myth. The immigration crisis has clearly shown that even within Europe there are no values in any General form. Everyone wants to protect their national interests. Who is the most talked about values — Germany and Sweden — the one who suffered most.
In this light, it is necessary to consider the Ukrainian tragedy. The fundamental difference between the conflict of values and conflict of interest is that conflicts of interest are resolved in the negotiations. But the conflict of values is, by definition, implies that one side is right and the second wrong.
In the case of Ukraine, Russia always held the opinion that we are talking about conflict of interests, so you need to meet and talk. The West, by contrast, considered values conflict occurring, to interfere in which Russia has no right. The result is war and devastation.
The West responded by imposing sanctions, the aim has never been to force Russia to change course of action. For Western policymakers, the sanctions have become a way to feel their own moral superiority, for which he was paid an exorbitant price — the fall trade and the collapse of the entire European security architecture. And now we’re in a situation when it is time to lift the sanctions, probably in the next year, and the Kremlin did not go on any concessions. A clear signal: the use of force is justified! It seems that the purpose of sanctions was not the case?
In conclusion, I would like to comment on Linda’s attempt to prove that Russia’s behavior has had a devastating effect on her, so we can not say that it was in the interest of the nation. Here is just a confusion. Without a doubt, in an objective sense, Putin’s policy is destructive for the Russian people. But what does this have to do with anything? We decided to focus on the danger of war? I think almost everyone will agree with me that today’s Russia is run by Putin and the close circle of his associates. And someone really believes that the last decade has been nothing but a succession of failures?
The war in Georgia stopped NATO expansion. I am quite sure that the war in Ukraine will lead it to crash, and Russia will regain a leading role. The invasion of Syria saved Assad, and the Americans were forced to negotiate, after which the Russian troops were withdrawn, until the price became too high. And sanctions have strengthened the regime, add fuel to the fire of conspiracy theories about how the West wants to break Russia. Public opinion polls show that the regime enjoys considerable support of the Russian population.
In General, it is hard to believe that Putin and his people now see anything but success. So here’s my final question: what made the West, with the exception of smug moral superiority?
Stefan Hedlund Professor Uppsala University, a specialist on Eastern countries.
<object width=”320″ height=”240″ data=”/content/5337997/<iframe width=”568″ height=”319″ src=”https:/www.youtube.com/embed/R07TIgQh2CM” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash”><param name=”src” value=”/content/5337997/<iframe width=”568″ height=”319″ src=”https:/www.youtube.com/embed/R07TIgQh2CM” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>”/></object>
