In September 2011, in the Yaroslavl forum to address one of the most famous Russian American political scientists Zbigniew Brzezinski sounded surprising to present familiar with the biography of the speaker and his concepts, the passage about the possibility of building an alliance of the West and Russia "from Vancouver to Vladivostok." Repetition of the same thesis in his latest book puzzled many.
hard to believe that one of the most consistent and tough opponents in Moscow trying to revise the basis of the concept, which for several decades, if not demanded life-and-death struggle, the isolation and ignoring the country in the former Soviet period for him and his colleagues "evil empire" and nowadays has become a "black hole" of world geopolitics.
Earth is round and ensure peace "from Vancouver to Vladivostok" is possible in both directions, including not only the security zone Russia, but dwelling on its eastern border. Brzezinski was never seen to be sympathetic to Russia, but with a sense of humor he always had everything in order. Suppose, however, that the new security concept of the West in general and the U.S. in particular offered them seriously.
America needs new partners
itself its evidence base is simple. America weakens, as the entire Western world. More questions on the planet can be solved without its participation or not, as she would like. Traditional allies and satellites behave more independently and are not inclined to have to subordinate their own interests to those of the cartridge. China builds strength -the most likely contender for the status of competing with the U.S. superpower. As a consequence unipolar world that emerged after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, bursting at the seams: on the agenda becoming multipolar world .
In this world, the U.S. and the Euro-Atlantic bloc risk take much smaller place than the one to which the West was used for at least the last hundred years. Summary: needs allies, which may be Turkey and Russia . Receiving a first integration into the European Union and the second in the global values of liberal democracy will solve the problem. Otherwise, the West threatens not only the oblivion of its former greatness, but after a while the catastrophic decline in influence.
reduction in the foreseeable future capabilities of the military-political bloc, simplistically referred to in domestic practice the West, to the border, which recently presented achievable only through agitation and propaganda clich?s ideological war -the same reality as the disappearance from the world map of the USSR and Yugoslavia , not to mention the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and Comecon.
Ad Francis Fukuyama status quo achieved by the results of the early 90`s, the "end of history" to those who were familiar with the story in the volume rate of the Soviet high school, it seemed no more than a doubtful speculation. Understanding people like Brzezinski, that this optimistic for Washington and Brussels forecast -no more than another desired issued for reality overtures to Russia, as well as the willingness to accept the concept of Yevgeny Primakov of a multipolar world, there is no reason to celebrate.
world is becoming multipolar, not so much as Nonpolarity: the military-political arena in accordance with the criticized for political correctness the concept of "war of civilizations" Samuel Huntington out movements and organizations that are unwilling to obey what whatsoever outside center. Competition leading players allows them to seek the necessary resources for its operation using international alliances fight for their own interests.
Among other things, completely unclear why Russia should become a pillar of the West in his hypothetical future confrontation with China , as, indeed, and that is why today`s Turkey.
alliances with Russia and former possible
alliance with competitors and enemies of the West against itself, whether in Iran, some countries in the Arab world or the Islamic world as a whole or the same China -no more than repeat the mistakes of leadership of the Russian Empire and the USSR in the last stage of the existence of these precursors of modern the Russian Federation. Attempts to draw Moscow into a confrontation with the West, offered as an alternative to the current exchange rate the country`s leadership, successfully blocking international initiative for intervention in Syria in the diplomatic field, no straight line, especially a military confrontation with those who are trying to organize this intervention -a consequence not only not so much effort Iranian or Syrian lobby as the natural reaction of a whole generation of Russian military and politicians.Last
already tired of waiting for two decades beginning of cooperation with the West, instead they observe attempts to exert pressure on Russia, ignoring her interests and non-fulfillment of the obligations that the majority of partners and Moscow violated penalized as appropriate and possible. Understandable reaction, but irrational.
Allies and opponents
To reiterate: win the West under the direct military confrontation is not only impossible, but pointless -times when the results achieved military victories and the occupation of the enemy passed. U.S. failures in Iraq and Afghanistan show this just as successful from a military standpoint campaign in Libya, NATO has become a Pyrrhic victory, leading to destabilization of the entire North Africa and opening the way to Europe millions of African illegals.
Conservatively, "Arab Spring", destroying defensive barrier in the face of authoritarian regimes in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, has set in motion about 18 million people, headed to the southern coast of the Mediterranean Sea at the moment . Demographic, environmental, military and political developments in sub-Saharan Africa suggest that this is only the beginning of a new "Great Migrations", which for obvious reasons has little to do with Russia, but the state of affairs in Europe could change dramatically.
This is a real threat, but, again, not for our country in contrast to the so-called yellow threat from China, Japan or other countries in the Pacific. Aging population in China, triggered by the policy of "one family -one child" means the inability of demographic expansion. Actual situation of Chinese immigration in Siberia and the Far East makes not talk about Chinese expansion, threatening the future of the Russian part of the country, and its rapid degradation compared to actively and effectively equip Northern China.
struggle with China for the Far East, with U.S. support, which involves the concept of Brzezinski, means integration of Russia in the program to ensure strategic security of the United States as a northern front in their future confrontation with China that Moscow has no meaning.
neutral position is bout these superpowers -present and future, while maintaining relations with both of them, on the contrary, sense is . Speaking specifically, joint exercises, and exchange of information in the volumes and areas where appropriate Moscow, point part in joint operations to combat drug trafficking, operating in international waters by pirates or terrorists to Russia helpful. Participation in global opposition on either side -NO .
Especially that the concept Brzezinski it assumes a subordinate position in Moscow, which should rebuild its domestic and foreign policy is not based on their own interests and obeying the need to "fit" the recommendations of the senior partner.This approach
late for 20-30 years. In the 80s, when the Soviet troops had not yet gone out of Afghanistan, the integration with the Soviet Union, instead of fighting with him would allow the U.S. to avoid not only the 9/11 attacks, but also all future wars in the Islamic world. In the early 90s, after the collapse of the USSR, the Russian political elite and public opinion considered indisputable advantages of the Western political system and were ready for integration as a junior partner of the West. Two decades have passed since then, not only undermined confidence in the feasibility and benefits of partnership on such terms, but also refute the West in general and the U.S. in particular, as a world leader.
If the application for this leadership would be supported by business, it is, perhaps, could be discussed as one of the options for development, and in this case Russia, it is possible, it would make sense together with Turkey alone or integrated into a future system of world order scenarios considered by Zbigniew Brzezinski. However, the situation is reversed. The presence of Western troops in hot spots provides neither stability nor security. Needless their number is not enough to succeed in the war against the enemy, the current partisan sabotage techniques.
strategic ally of the West in the Islamic world -consistent enemies of Russia , and their interests in the destruction of the secular regimes in the Arab world and in promoting them oriented versions of radical Islam in the Russian Federation is fundamentally inconsistent with basic Russian interests, regardless of whether these allies Arab monarchies of the Gulf, believing Russian territory jihad, or Turkey, for which it is the main trading partner. Yes, and Turkey itself does not seek more than the EU, but only uses slogans of European integration for the suppression of the generals in favor of politicians, based on Islamism.
Political Islam is not an ally of the U.S. and Europe, contrary to the illusions of Western political scientists and politicians , including Brzezinski served and is not the last, that it is possible. Use the West in their own interests, ignoring calls for human rights and successfully benefiting from economic cooperation, the Islamic world will be -nothing more.
Attempts to copy this experience in the Russian case, were doomed to failure, as well as any copy produced, excluding the current balance of interests, the balance of forces and the level of competition for the attention of the local elites, in which Russia can not be a source of free arms, under investment illusory guarantee or contingents of armed forces in local wars as military advisers, as was the Soviet Union. More precisely, intervention in these wars, regardless of whose side it is theoretically possible, but it will only lead to bankruptcy and the disintegration of Russia itself . To ignore this is impossible, no matter what arguments "for" no advanced supporters or opponents Brzezinski.
Especially that local players have shown and are showing disloyalty against the West they need and it is unclear why will not behave the same way in relation to Russia. It`s not just Turkey, Pakistan and Arab U.S. allies, which in the case of support groups openly hostile to America, whether it is Hamas, "the Muslim Brotherhood", "Islamic Jihad" or movement of Haqqani.
Iran behaves slightly more friendly towards Russia that demonstrate how to claim $ 4 billion, served in a Swiss court in connection with the non-delivery of Tehran S-300 and overt pressure on Russia against redistribution of the Caspian Sea basin.
Ultimately, as practice shows, only state in the Middle East, which does not act against the United States or the EU -is Israel , but in spite of Jerusalem mythology and stereotypes in the national security establishment in the Soviet era, and about Russia operate correctly despite the difficult perception of Russian-Syrian and Russian-Iranian relations. However, the United States itself against Israel even Israel with its powerful lobbying resource in internal American politics are little regard for his interests, breaking promises and commitments and ignoring not only where it is considered useful to U.S. policy in general, but where required by corporate or personal career interests of the State Department officials, defense ministries or the intelligence community.
For Russia it is a good example of how to enter the United States with its closest allies , among which our country does not apply and will not be treated. With temporary allies and even more fellow travelers, even if they call them allies, is considered to be even smaller and not only in Washington. However, trying to engage U.S. allies in its area of influence is impossible. At least in the Arab world between local elites and the West are based on hundreds of billions of mutual business interests and investments, and have decades of cooperation prospects for generations.
Whatever it was, civil war in Syria started phase intercommunal conflict spread to Lebanon and it is possible, go to the Turkish and Jordanian territory . In the case of the overthrow of Assad, when Palestinian Islamists will almost certainly try to limit the power of the Jordanian Hashemite family, and ideally to overthrow the dynasty, in the formation of the Syrian Kurdish independent enclave in addition to Iraqi Kurdistan, Kurdish separatism activates in Eastern Anatolia.
Until then, until Assad is not eliminated physically, not offset the immediate environment, it is not organized against foreign intervention in Syria or not fully embodied in the script of the Lebanese civil war, he has a chance to retain power. If he usidit before the great Gulf War involving Iran, the probability of which is particularly high in the first half of 2013, between U.S. and Iranian presidential elections, it is not possible to overthrow the Alawite regime in Damascus will cease to be interested in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey as primary objectives and mode will have a chance to transform. North Korean example forces us to assume this possibility.
situation with Iran is much more difficult . Breakthrough in the nuclear field, demonstrated Tehran means collapse of the nonproliferation regime. Israeli attack on Iran is possible, although promotion stop Iran`s nuclear bomb no more than one or two years -a long time for a region like the Middle East.
Beat the United States and its European NATO allies will destroy the Iranian nuclear program with absolute probability, although the idea of displacement or Westernization of the Iranian regime can be attributed to the pre-bankrupt American idealist dreams of policy, such as repeatedly mentioned Brzezinski.For Russia
instability around Iran unpleasant but ultimately means not so much the threat of American influence in the near periphery of Russia -as the Afghan and Iraqi experience, this effect should not be exaggerated, as the lack of competition with Iran in the European energy markets over a relatively long time.
How would say Winston Churchill: " Some see the crisis at every opportunity. Others find opportunity in every crisis ". Russia Sir Winston loved nothing more than Brzezinski, but unlike him, had an enviable clarity of thinking and iron logic.
/ Yevgeny Satanovsky, president of the Institute of the Middle East, vpk-news.ru /