On the background of the obvious economic crisis in the country tip of the Russian Federation is trying to raise his falling popularity by the claims of some Grand achievements in foreign policy. They say, Russia rises from his knees. Adversary in a panic. The people rejoice…
In fact, people do not have much to do with foreign policy. Its much more interested in the problems of falling incomes and the concomitant rise in utility tariffs, prices for food and medicines. The people’s discontent with their position enhanced. In these circumstances, the Russian “elite” is trying to use the growing pressure from the United States to mobilize people in support of the ruling group. According to the principle “the enemy at the threshold, rally around the leader”.
But try to be objective. What can you put in the merit of the current government in foreign policy? The Crimea? But that was four years ago. The bulk of the credit for the return of the Peninsula to Russia belongs to the Crimeans, the rebels February 25-27, 2014 in Simferopol and Sevastopol.
Syria? To maintain-to protect our long-time strategic ally, almost the only in the middle East is certainly good. Russian pilots, engineers, gunners, engineers, military advisors played an important role in preventing the seizure of Syria by terrorist gangs. Let’s not forget, however, that in all wars, a crucial role is always played by the infantry. But on the ground the brunt of the war brought to the Syrian and Iranian troops, a large formation of Hezbollah in Lebanon. Without them, no victory over ISIL would not have been…
Well, here, perhaps, and all! Everything else — the exchange of barbs between the Russian elite and their Western “partners”. It served as the foreign resistance. Those who understands something in foreign policy, these barbs to cheat can’t. Russian “elite” is eager to return to “club” and was very offended that they’re kept outside. But if you do, it will run headlong. There is no doubt.
In foreign policy in the red? The complete failure around the perimeter of Russia’s borders. First of all, in relations with the former Union republics of the USSR. Ukraine is a foreign policy catastrophe. To let a bunch of adventurers in Kiev, relying only on extremists from Galicia, so as to spoil the centuries-old relations between our fraternal peoples — it is still necessary to manage. As did not have a coherent policy on Ukraine, so its not so far. Throwing all those frantic attempts to drive the Donbass in the Ukraine without losing face — that’s all “politics” in this area. Smacks of betrayal.
About the same in the Baltic area. To have a powerful foothold in Latvia, Estonia and partly Lithuania in the Russian-speaking population and allow them to turn this country into a foothold of NATO is the manifestation of a complete lack of will of the ruling elite of the Russian Federation.
Not much better things in the Caucasus. Georgia, who has always been in a special position within the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, suddenly found himself the most anti-Russian country in the region. Although the bulk of Georgians are very friendly (yet!) configured to Russia. After all, affected by centuries of life in the state of the family. However does not feel the current government attempts to use this traditional relationship.
Approximately the same situation in Central Asia. Kazakhstan under the leadership of highly experienced Nazarbayev leaves, skillfully maneuvering, the zone of influence of Russia. With Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan relations on the verge of freezing. With Central Asia increasingly tight China works.
We must not forget that inclusion in NATO of our former allies in the Warsaw Pact and former republics of the Soviet Union — the result of a deliberate “non-resistance to evil” leaders of the Russian Federation. And now they have a plaintive moan about the bases ABOUT the United States in Romania and Poland. And what about the frankly evil behavior of the poles which pull down with impunity dozens of monuments to soldiers of the red army-liberator. Feel the weakness of Russia. There is no other explanation…
Well, of course, in any gate not climbing an unprecedented blatant mockery of our athletes by the International Olympic Committee, did not receive a proper rebuff from the Russian state. It is a transcendent manifestation of lack of will of the Russian “elite”, after which talk about foreign policy successes it is not necessary.
What is the reason for a series of failures, you are trying to pass off the victory? The main thing is that the Russian ruling group to the last time felt like part of the world oligarchy. And, as they say, “Raven from a crow does not eat dog”. Problems in relations with the West solved through concessions. From the Russian side, of course. Differently and could not be. There is a famous expression Zbignew Brzezinski, “Russia can have any number of nuclear suitcases, but since $ 500 billion of the Russian elite are in our banks, you understand: it is your elite or already ours?”.
As you know, the foreign policy of any state is a reflection of the interests of the ruling class. If the ruling comprador is rigidly oriented to the West of the oligarchic-bureaucratic class, other than a Pro-Western foreign policy in Russia and can not be. And the stories about the “miracle weapon”, the proud anti-Western posture masquerading as newfound independence is nothing more than an element of trade with the United States and its allies. All this “independence” is the desire of the Russian oligarchy, gained confidence during the presidency of Vladimir Putin, to protect its right to “master” (better to say, to plunder) and other natural wealth of Russia, which vehemently attacking their Western “partners”.
Another cause of failures in flagrant incompetence “creators” of Russian foreign policy. It is not about the management and staff of the Ministry of foreign Affairs. They have a professionalism in General everything is in order. Russian/Soviet school of diplomacy — one of the best in the world. The fact that the concept of foreign policy is much broader than diplomacy. The efforts of all organs of the government. The efforts of public and private campaigns.
In the Soviet Union in the international field worked for the Ministry of foreign Affairs, Ministry of foreign trade, Ministry of defense, KGB, the state Committee for foreign economic relations (gkes), the state Committee on science and technology, and the mass of the Ministry and agencies, or otherwise relevant to international activities
And this activity is very well coordinated by the foreign Ministry and the International Department of the CPSU Central Committee. After the relevant decisions of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the USSR Council of Ministers, all involved organizations were required to act in the same direction, to help each other. Rigid party discipline and government of those times was provided that “the General line” was carried out strictly.
Now foreign policy is in a state of confusion and hesitation, who in the woods, who for firewood. Or the famous Trinity “Swan, cancer and pike”. A single strategic line no. Developments in specific areas either. Breed relentlessly abstruse (and useless) multi-page “doctrine”, for which their creators pay a lot of money.
But even in those cases where it is clear that we need to do something specific, all stakeholders again pull someone in the woods, who for firewood. Yes, and tough to compete in the “distribution” of funds allocated for a particular foreign policy program.
The MFA is clearly not eager to organize the chaos. Moreover, it is almost useless. The country is controlled in “manual mode”: who was the first to enlist the approval of the head of state, he is right. Public discipline is almost extinct concept. And now, party discipline does not exist, because technically, the state authorities non-partisan. That is, the coordination tools of foreign policy are almost there. The national security Council is, apparently, the body that was supposed to do the coordinating. The sum, however, the feeling that he’s not very committed.
To summarize. Any success in foreign policy is not in principle can not be. Warlike shouts and curses against the “partners” from the camp of the ruling elite in reality are cries of desperation. They dread tightening Western sanctions and seek an opportunity not to irritate their “partners”. What kind of “independence”? Not to fat-be alive…
© 2018, mercurynews.org. All rights reserved