Nuland, Obama & NeoConlite had no business going in there in '14, and those 2 breakaway provinces wanted to go back to Russia and were being shelled (15K killed) by their own Ukraine government before the invasion. I hope we ( US) stays out of it. Time for peace.
And the West led by the USA destroyed the "peace dividend", betraying and asset-stripping Russia, and followed the neocons' PNAC agenda, leaving death, destruction and mayhem in its wake. Perhaps we've reached the end point, but Trump needs to ensure the unelected neocons won't run foreign policy in the future.
I too seek a rejection of the current imposed Liberal World Order.
I can also understand the movement towards a more multi-polar world order. And by that I do mean What it really is. A transition period and a time some degree of greater flexible power competition. I'm not some naive gullible fool, the equivalent of a genuine believer in the narratives told of itself in the liberal world order. The only reason Russia China or otherwise wants to move to a multi-polar world order is to have a greater chance of maneuvering to expand their spheres of influence and one day be able to take the chance at becoming the new global hedgemon themselves. The fact that some would narcissistically claim they seek no such thing confirms they have the perfect self-righteous view of themselves to do and support exactly that when the time comes.
That is something completely natural and understandable.
So let's not pretend that a possible age of an increased multi-polar order Is anything other for Russia in long-term.
It is the result of the USA, which heavily influences the states of "the west," but itself most of all going through a period of discontent, what I call the Populist-flux, unintentional and intentional self-reflection, possible reform, and possibly renewal with a new understanding if itself and its mission that can somehow manage to synthesize everything that has gone before. Correcting and re-answering deep fundamental questions. If achieved there is absolutely no greater legitimizing reason the USA should not seek to re-establish its global dominance. Re-established with a new understanding of itself and what it wishes to say and spread to the world. Something that it seeks to embody but which remains properly greater than itself.
The USA should not willingly allow others to manoeuvre to one day be able to exert more influence on it than vice versa.
Coming now to my main response to the article here:
A rejection of the liberal world order and moving into a more multi-polar world order while the USA at last reevaluates and reorientates its priorities for the time being, does not in any way imply a necessity in giving Russia "equal" footing and treatment, particularly in the wish list manner that's described in this piece.
Let this be made very clear. The USA does not yet even currently have the need to concede the South China sea or any country surrounding most of China's borders that the USA is allied with to China. In a post liberal world order that continues to increasingly weaken, Russia will get what they've won in eastern Ukraine. And that is all. A world ruled more by power and respect which was always the case but was more "hidden," means Russia gets treated at the level it deserves to be by the USA. Not though held up global legal institutions, not how it would like to dictate how is to be treated, but how it deserves to be treated.
Russia is a second rate power that does not deserve to have an expended, and indeed inflated, sphere of influence which it could never hope to take itself, given to it by the USA. Even during the USA's reduced global touch during its search and reform revolution internally, as things currently stand. Or perhaps even especially during it.
The current Russian Federation is both unable and undeserving of the sphere of influence past iterations of Russia possessed and even sought out. Again, it will get what it fought for in defiance of the liberal order. It will not be given what it cannot get itself. All of Ukraine? The Baltic States? Any part of Eastern Europe? Anything at all in the Middle East? As laughable as it is pathetic to even entertain the idea.
The USA can and will both directly wind itself down abroad and currently can and still will empower others who are willing overseas by different means to prevent rival powers from usurping American influence if it pleases. In a post-liberal world order, the balance of power and of great or at least relatively greater powers re-emerges to the surface to act more directly in relation to one another. In that world Russia remains a lesser power under the USA. One that does not get close to what it fully desires. The USA does away with liberal aspirational illusions and treats Russia without antagonism, but also without absurd and self-destructive undue charity. Particularly absent providing undeserving gifts in the realm of the absurd.
It depends what Dugin means in terms of Ukraine, the Baltics, and Eastern Europe being part of Russia's sphere of influence. Does he mean they take it by force? I don't believe they can or would want to try to control such a vast unwilling populace again, that was essentially occupied. I don't think he means either that the US would hand over those areas; we can't. I think what he means is that if/once the US pulls out of Europe (NATO), given how weak the EU, the UK and western Europe have become and would further fall without US support, those areas Dugin mentions would re-gravitate to Russia, if for no other reason than economic necessity.
Certainly a provoking piece, harkening back to the pragmatic realpolitik of pre-liberal world. Or perhaps the world was always that way and its only now that the West is waking up from its own self-inflicted liberal stupor.
There’s nothing pragmatic on the part of the USA to unnecessarily weaken itself while it’s pulling back from global affairs to reform itself. Particularly when it comes to giving Russia, the absurd wish list presented here. In a true post liberal world order, Russia still doesn’t get what it wants. It managed to fight for parts of eastern Ukraine, so it should get it. That’s something the USA can respect.
Russia is unable to get all of Ukraine, the Baltic states, any part of eastern Europe, any part of the Middle East, etc by its own power status. It’s utterly absurd to even suggest that the USA should hand anything to them that they can’t get themselves. Russia remains unequal to the USA in a postal liberal world order. In fact, that should become even more explicit. No more liberal euphemisms. Russia should know it is subservient or to stay out of the way in both ordered scenarios.
The wrestling and playing for domination is not unsurprising- the harkening back means, we are seeing a gradual shift back to a position where powers had to navigate their relations with each other in a measured way. The age of American unilaterlism appears to wane, but nothing is written in stone.
One of the things I would like to see dome away with in a post liberal world order is the doing away with nonsense pretensions. Sovereign? No. That would be a stupid lie. It would be dominated by Russia or America.
Nuland, Obama & NeoConlite had no business going in there in '14, and those 2 breakaway provinces wanted to go back to Russia and were being shelled (15K killed) by their own Ukraine government before the invasion. I hope we ( US) stays out of it. Time for peace.
I was eight years old when the Berlin Wall fell. I remember watching it on the TV.
I’d hoped it meant our two great countries could be friends someday.
Too soon to say, but I’m amazed at all that’s changed.
And the West led by the USA destroyed the "peace dividend", betraying and asset-stripping Russia, and followed the neocons' PNAC agenda, leaving death, destruction and mayhem in its wake. Perhaps we've reached the end point, but Trump needs to ensure the unelected neocons won't run foreign policy in the future.
This is the only way we can destroy globohomo
I too seek a rejection of the current imposed Liberal World Order.
I can also understand the movement towards a more multi-polar world order. And by that I do mean What it really is. A transition period and a time some degree of greater flexible power competition. I'm not some naive gullible fool, the equivalent of a genuine believer in the narratives told of itself in the liberal world order. The only reason Russia China or otherwise wants to move to a multi-polar world order is to have a greater chance of maneuvering to expand their spheres of influence and one day be able to take the chance at becoming the new global hedgemon themselves. The fact that some would narcissistically claim they seek no such thing confirms they have the perfect self-righteous view of themselves to do and support exactly that when the time comes.
That is something completely natural and understandable.
So let's not pretend that a possible age of an increased multi-polar order Is anything other for Russia in long-term.
It is the result of the USA, which heavily influences the states of "the west," but itself most of all going through a period of discontent, what I call the Populist-flux, unintentional and intentional self-reflection, possible reform, and possibly renewal with a new understanding if itself and its mission that can somehow manage to synthesize everything that has gone before. Correcting and re-answering deep fundamental questions. If achieved there is absolutely no greater legitimizing reason the USA should not seek to re-establish its global dominance. Re-established with a new understanding of itself and what it wishes to say and spread to the world. Something that it seeks to embody but which remains properly greater than itself.
The USA should not willingly allow others to manoeuvre to one day be able to exert more influence on it than vice versa.
Coming now to my main response to the article here:
A rejection of the liberal world order and moving into a more multi-polar world order while the USA at last reevaluates and reorientates its priorities for the time being, does not in any way imply a necessity in giving Russia "equal" footing and treatment, particularly in the wish list manner that's described in this piece.
Let this be made very clear. The USA does not yet even currently have the need to concede the South China sea or any country surrounding most of China's borders that the USA is allied with to China. In a post liberal world order that continues to increasingly weaken, Russia will get what they've won in eastern Ukraine. And that is all. A world ruled more by power and respect which was always the case but was more "hidden," means Russia gets treated at the level it deserves to be by the USA. Not though held up global legal institutions, not how it would like to dictate how is to be treated, but how it deserves to be treated.
Russia is a second rate power that does not deserve to have an expended, and indeed inflated, sphere of influence which it could never hope to take itself, given to it by the USA. Even during the USA's reduced global touch during its search and reform revolution internally, as things currently stand. Or perhaps even especially during it.
The current Russian Federation is both unable and undeserving of the sphere of influence past iterations of Russia possessed and even sought out. Again, it will get what it fought for in defiance of the liberal order. It will not be given what it cannot get itself. All of Ukraine? The Baltic States? Any part of Eastern Europe? Anything at all in the Middle East? As laughable as it is pathetic to even entertain the idea.
The USA can and will both directly wind itself down abroad and currently can and still will empower others who are willing overseas by different means to prevent rival powers from usurping American influence if it pleases. In a post-liberal world order, the balance of power and of great or at least relatively greater powers re-emerges to the surface to act more directly in relation to one another. In that world Russia remains a lesser power under the USA. One that does not get close to what it fully desires. The USA does away with liberal aspirational illusions and treats Russia without antagonism, but also without absurd and self-destructive undue charity. Particularly absent providing undeserving gifts in the realm of the absurd.
It depends what Dugin means in terms of Ukraine, the Baltics, and Eastern Europe being part of Russia's sphere of influence. Does he mean they take it by force? I don't believe they can or would want to try to control such a vast unwilling populace again, that was essentially occupied. I don't think he means either that the US would hand over those areas; we can't. I think what he means is that if/once the US pulls out of Europe (NATO), given how weak the EU, the UK and western Europe have become and would further fall without US support, those areas Dugin mentions would re-gravitate to Russia, if for no other reason than economic necessity.
"multipolar?" Is what you describe really multipolar?
Certainly a provoking piece, harkening back to the pragmatic realpolitik of pre-liberal world. Or perhaps the world was always that way and its only now that the West is waking up from its own self-inflicted liberal stupor.
There’s nothing pragmatic on the part of the USA to unnecessarily weaken itself while it’s pulling back from global affairs to reform itself. Particularly when it comes to giving Russia, the absurd wish list presented here. In a true post liberal world order, Russia still doesn’t get what it wants. It managed to fight for parts of eastern Ukraine, so it should get it. That’s something the USA can respect.
Russia is unable to get all of Ukraine, the Baltic states, any part of eastern Europe, any part of the Middle East, etc by its own power status. It’s utterly absurd to even suggest that the USA should hand anything to them that they can’t get themselves. Russia remains unequal to the USA in a postal liberal world order. In fact, that should become even more explicit. No more liberal euphemisms. Russia should know it is subservient or to stay out of the way in both ordered scenarios.
The wrestling and playing for domination is not unsurprising- the harkening back means, we are seeing a gradual shift back to a position where powers had to navigate their relations with each other in a measured way. The age of American unilaterlism appears to wane, but nothing is written in stone.
The New USSR
Union of
Sovereign
Slavic
Republics
One of the things I would like to see dome away with in a post liberal world order is the doing away with nonsense pretensions. Sovereign? No. That would be a stupid lie. It would be dominated by Russia or America.