At the same time, the de facto division of the world into two poles of self-interest is consolidated by overarching competing ideologies. The ideologies are not as comprehensive as the Communism/Free World ideologies of the Cold War. But they are crisply defined and effective rallying points nonetheless. And like the ideologies that were supposedly made irrelevant with the Cold War’s demise in 1989 and the fall of the Soviet Union in 1992, the new ideologies deal with how human society shall be organized and what are its highest values.
On the side of the EU and the USA, democracy, precisely as practiced in America, neo-liberal economics, and human rights in their latest and most expansive edition that has barely taken root among US and European progressives, are the defining elements of what constitutes a good society. By definition, only such societies are stable and peace-loving. Those countries which differ with the golden standard must be brought into line to ensure a peaceful world. This can be done any which way: by subversion or non-military coercion to bring about regime change, or by pure military force if non-military methods fail to bring about the desired results.
On the side of Russia and China, there is the belief that for nation-states true freedom means freedom to follow their own development course and to organize their societies in keeping with national traditions. Moreover, they staunchly defend the principles of Westphalia, meaning the equality of sovereign states and non-intervention in the internal affairs of other states.
For all of these reasons, the Concert of Powers that the global leading minds have been invited to discuss by the Valdai Club this week is an irrelevancy. We are well and truly back on track to a bipolar world, which, in any case, many IR experts have long believed is more stable, hence more promising of global peace, than an ever shifting balance of power among five or six major players.…This is an assessment of international relations and geopolitics that I basically agree with. Good history lesson as backgrounder, too.
Russia Insider
The Unipolar World Is Ending
Gilbert Doctorow
See also for another backgrounder.
Irrussianality
Paul Robinson | Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa
4 comments:
"On the side of Russia and China, there is the belief that for nation-states true freedom means freedom to follow their own development course and to organize their societies in keeping with national traditions. Moreover, they staunchly defend the principles of Westphalia, meaning the equality of sovereign states and non-intervention in the internal affairs of other states."
Complete and utter Bullshit!!! China certainly didnt practice anything like this concept of state equality and non-intervention throughout its history, the only reason the post Mao- China epoch can be said to be "westphalian" is because their country was so backwards and broken that they couldnt have meddled in modern affairs even if they wanted to. Now that they have become more of a modern state, they are meddling all over the world financially if not yet militarily.
And Russia....WTF? So their empire where they invaded, conquered, and occupied a dozen states doesnt count. Even now Russia is intervening militarily in two different countries.
Russia and China preach about restraint and staying out of other country's affairs only when the West is meddling and they dont like it due to their specific geo-political objectives. And the West preaches about restraint and staying out of other country's affairs only when Russia and China are meddling and We dont like it for our specific geo-political objectives
Agreed with Auburn. Also I don't think we will have a peaceful transition to a multipolar world, or a long lasting peace. Instead I see an increase in proxy wars, and if things get ugly a major confrontation.
P.S: Historically chinese elites have been brutal, just saying...
Doctrow is talking about the view of IR based on different world orders, 1) unipolar, that is, hegemony where the hegemon gets to make and break the rules, 2) the Westphalian model of national sovereignty, in which Russia is in Syria legal and the US is not, or 3) bipolarism, in which two blocs face off over different views about the rules and who makes them.
Some IR specialists think that the US is still the hegemon and is not seriously challenged. Others think that the Westphalian model is challenging US hegemony successfully, that is, BRICS. Doctrow thinks that the bipolar model of the West (US and NATO) is now facing of with the East (Russia and China) and it's already a bipolar world.
Now value judgment made or implied. It's about IR and the current state of affairs geopolitically.
<I"Now value judgment" should be "no value judgment"
Post a Comment