Translated material
Vacial dreams of the "sacred union"
The new version of the concept of foreign policy of Russia, signed by the chief chief of the country on December 1, well not attracted much attention to the public. The price of such documents is known - in them the Kremlin does not tell about how much he intends to pursue, but only that the world around us should know about his policy. Ultimately, the analysis of each of the many “doctrines” and “concepts” is reduced to the work of a paleontologist: attempts to restore the image of a dinosaur by a fragment of only a bone.
However, no matter how the authors of directive documents try to hide their genuine views, in one they are doomed to fully frankness. From their scriptures, ideas about the ideal world order inevitably emerge. So, what are they dreamed of in the Kremlin and on Smolensk Square?
The concept is long and needs to list the complexity and uncertainty of the modern world. Thus, its authors with disapproval state that "in the context of the aggravation of political, social, economic contradictions and the growth of instability of the world political and economic system, the role of the force of power in international relations is increased." In these complaints, of course, there is a fair share of hypocrisy. Because just over the past three years, military force has turned into the main, if not the only foreign policy tool.
It is no coincidence that the authors of the concept do not like that “in the foreground ... such important factors of the influence of states on international politics are put forward as economic, legal, technological, informational. The desire to use the appropriate opportunities for the implementation of geopolitical interests causes damage to the search for ways of resolving disputes and solving existing international problems with peaceful means based on international law. ” They are also annoyed by “using software for solving the foreign policy problems of“ soft power ”, primarily the possibilities of civil society, information-communication, humanitarian and other methods and technologies, in addition to traditional diplomatic methods.” After all, it turns out that "the ideological values imposed from outside and recipes for modernizing the political system of states have strengthened the negative reaction of society to the challenges of our time." And to top it off the description of the imperfections of the world: "Competition not only covers human, scientific and technological potentials, but also becomes more and more than the civilizational nature, the form of rivalry of value guidelines."
Thus, there is not just competition, but even civilizational rivalry. At the same time, Moscow does not seem to approve when states affirm their interests by military means. Moreover, from the point of view of the Kremlin, one should not affirm their interests with the help of economic, legal, technological, information tools. It is not good to use “soft power”.
How, one wonders, is it proposed to implement foreign policy? In the concept, almost every paragraph declares Moscow’s commitment to international law. What looks especially convincing after the annexation of Crimea. The problem is that each state interprets contracts and agreements in its interests, which Russia has demonstrated during the Ukrainian crisis. But the authors of the concept have a radical tool. They offer all other states to form “value foundations of joint actions based on the general spiritual and moral potential of the main world religions, as well as on such principles and concepts as the desire for peace and justice, dignity, freedom, responsibility, honesty, mercy and hard work”. Moreover, "the rule of law in international relations is designed to ensure peaceful and fruitful cooperation of states subject to the balance of their interests."
So, here it is ideal, from the point of view of the Kremlin, world order. The balance of interests based on religious values that will ensure the cessation of civilizational competition. Putin has repeatedly expressed approval of the "Yalta system." But the Yalta system was a pure balance of power, without attempts to support moral values (Roosevelt and Churchill perfectly understood that Stalin simply had no moral values). When foreign policy relies on religion, this is not even the twentieth century, it is a century of XIX. Do you know what is most like? On the "Holy Union" of European monarchs, concluded after the victory over Napoleon. When the actual section of Europe was justified by Christian values and the will of the monarchs. The authors of the concept are clearly trying to grab the style of Putin's diplomacy, which boils down to the achievement of some frequent agreements between the heads of state. The head of the foreign ministry, Sergei Lavrov, remembered, even complained that too frequent and unprofitable the change of Western leaders strongly interferes with the matter ...
However, as they say, be afraid to dream. Dreams can come true. With the election of Donald Trump, the Kremlin President, in his misfortune, received a “counter-partner”, which holds approximately the same primitive views on international politics. And which, it seems, will not slow down to use the entire military, political and economic power of the United States to realize what he will consider American interests. The concept leaves Russia "the right to respond to unfriendly actions, including by strengthening national defense and taking mirror or asymmetric measures." As if an attempt to implement these measures did not come around the whole world ...