The Vladimir Putin’s election for a new term means the major foreign policy guidelines outlined in his article called Russia and the Changing World are going to be further implemented. The article calls for the resurrection of the bipolar world order when no one involved in confrontation could allow the luxury of breaching the UN Charter. And even if it was done, there was “a bill to pay” for it as a rule. True, those days the world order was based on intimidation but it no doubt helped to strengthen global security.
After the old bipolar world was destroyed and the balance of power between the USSR and the USA no more served as a foundation, the West was quick enough to say goodbye to the spirit of equality in interstate relations and embarked on the way of establishing unilateral global dominance. In his article Russia and the Changing World Vladimir Putin clearly showed it is not the trend in international politics that Russia is going to support.
The Russian leadership is convinced that the efforts should be applied to restore the UN as a tool to maintain the interstate relations based on equality and justice. Washington is given a clear signal that Russia will strengthen its independent foreign policy. An attempt to involve Russia into defending the US interests instead of the national ones with the help of the “reset” policy failed. Russia will not do what it is told. The Western response to the article is interesting because it allows to see the extent of mutual understanding between Russia and the West. The inert and skeptical reaction of the Western political community makes the article be a voice in the wilderness. During the last twenty years of permissiveness on the international stage the powers representing the driving force of their society have become accustomed to the idea that they are irreproachable in their vision of the world. Their hearing is configured to hear only the sounds that match the tune. The Putin’s ideas about the equality, sovereignty and mutual respect in international relations are simple at first glance but they perceive them through a filter of ideological prejudices. The response is most clearly seen among US and British politicians.
It couldn’t be any other way for the basis of the Anglo-Saxon vision of international relations is the conception of the world as a stage and them being stage directors. This political culture has been in existence for many dozens of years. It was hidden or stood out depending on how strong the adversary was but it never disappeared. It goes back to the activities of influential Masonic lodges in the XVIII-XIX centuries when a clandestine power system was created in Britain, then France and then was spread among the major part of the West. The system is based on the principles that have never been made public but have been adhered to in real life. Here are some of them:
1. There are real policies defined by a limited number of individuals and groups of people, and public policies serving as a cover for the real ones.
2. The real policies always serve the interests of a narrow group in possession of the major part of national wealth. Today it’s a few dozens of Anglo-American and Jewish financial and industrial clans.
3. The public policies are a theatre where parts are played for money. The actors are public politicians, the whole range of commercial media, special mechanisms of mass consciousness control in the form of ideological, propaganda and information centers, special services, as well as the “fifth columns” abroad.
The synchronous play of the two instruments – the public policies “for people” and real policies “for themselves” since a long time have become a factor of international life that received the name of “double standards” policy.
The term may not be fully correct. In reality there is only one standard here – self-interested approach of the real policies creators to the relations with other nations. The public policies is a theater set for sanctimonious concealment of real goals. That’s why no such thing as double standards exists – there is only a habit “to use” public as a managed herd.
The more the theory of globalism have spread around, the more false moral categories have become in demand. Sanctimonious moralism has put down deep roots in the Western political culture and has become part and parcel of influence exerted upon opponents. Special attention should be paid to the US “fifth columns” in many countries, where the USA tries to strengthen its position. No matter what the motives are in separate cases, the “fifth columns” serve the “real” Anglo-Saxon policies that stands far from the national interests of their homelands, be it Russophobia in Central Europe, especially in Poland, “westernism” in Ukraine, or “liberalism” in Russia. The fact that they got mixed the “real” policies with “public” ones could hardly ever be a justification of their actions. The correct wording of the Putin’s article leads to the conclusion that a new confrontation with the West is inevitable. We are different in our perception of basic values of international relations: the issues concerning international morals, justice and equality.
The Anglo-Saxons have never been true adherents of these values, that’s what defines other things. They are unable to be honest and equal partners in the cooperation process. It will not let them unite efforts while trying to solve the most important global problems. The behavior of the Anglo-Saxon allies in the Second World War is an example. They were waiting till Germany and the USSR exhaust each other in a pitched battle and opened the Second front only to be in time to jump on the footboard of a departing train. That’s the example important to be remembered by the politicians who count on receiving dividends while cooperating with the West.
As the history shows the Americans start to hear the arguments of the other side only if it has teeth to show if required. That’s how it was in the middle of the 1970s when the USSR achieved nuclear parity with the USA or in 1961, when Soviet missiles appeared in Cuba.
No doubt they study the Putin’s article attentively in Washington, London, Brussels, Paris. First of all it’s plausible weaknesses that they are looking for. At the same time, they, in the West, cannot understand that the program like presentation is not his personal vision of the world or something said due to competition oriented motivation. This is an address reflecting the sentiments of the whole Russian society longing for their country to rise and restore the position of great world power. It wouldn’t be timely according to the Western views. The feeling of indignation concerning the policy of “double standards” is spreading in the world. In fact the policy is “the law of jungle” barely disguised by hypocrisy. The ”law” is rejected by the very nature of interstate relations that badly need a counterbalance to stand up to international brigandage attempts. By the will of fate Russia is the one who lays the claim.
The crisis engendered by the situation in Syria and Iran is transforming into the crucial factor that will finally disperse the mist of political mystifications away and make clear the global division into two camps. Moscow doesn’t speak about it in full voice yet but very soon this kind of conversation will become inevitable.