{"id":1381,"date":"2023-06-16T16:25:56","date_gmt":"2023-06-16T16:25:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2023\/06\/16\/do-not-underestimate-russias-resolve\/"},"modified":"2023-06-16T16:25:56","modified_gmt":"2023-06-16T16:25:56","slug":"do-not-underestimate-russias-resolve","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2023\/06\/16\/do-not-underestimate-russias-resolve\/","title":{"rendered":"Do Not Underestimate Russia’s Resolve"},"content":{"rendered":"

An American Thinker<\/em> article<\/a> by our friend, James Soriano.   <\/span><\/p>\n

\n

The two camps differ not only on the cause of war, they have completely different world views as to how a system of sovereign states works.   Russian war policy is the epitome of a broader realist approach to international affairs:  states have interests, not friends, and they must rely on self-help to do what is necessary to protect themselves.  Accordingly, Russia went to war not to conquer, but from a no-nonsense threat assessment.  By contrast, the United States entered the fray with an ideologically charged missionary spirit.  The U.S. has long seen itself as the savior of the world, the \u201cindispensable nation,\u201d  Its diplomatic discourse often lapses into moralizing rhetoric.  It believes that a world filled with more democracies would be a safer and better place than it is today.  It is disdainful of traditional balance of power politics and favors a \u201crules based\u201d world order.  The Russian view of power politics is \u201cbottom up\u201d and conservative.  It insists that a state\u2019s historical and geographic circumstances must be taken into account.  It grapples with the question, \u201cWhat is there?\u201d  The American view of the world is \u201ctop-down\u201d and revolutionary.  It is less concerned with historical contexts than with hypothetical theorizing about how people and states ought to behave.  It grapples with the question, \u201cWhat should be there?\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

[. . .]<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

One side is saying that world peace is served when the great powers exercise self-restraint and are respectful of other powers\u2019 security.  The other side is saying that maintaining a sphere of influence is implicitly an aggressive act.  One side is saying that tension between the great powers is not the result of the particular character of their regimes, but rather is built into the international system whenever a great power veers out of its lane.  The other side is saying that a regime\u2019s character is exactly the point, because different characters affect the relations among the states in different ways.  One side emphasizes historical and geographic circumstances as a constant in world affairs.  The other side de-emphasizes these in favor of an overlay of law and ethical precepts.<\/span><\/p>\n

Many Russians believe that U.S. talk about \u201cspheres of influence,\u201d and respect for Ukraine\u2019s sovereignty, and the need for a \u201crules-based\u201d international order is only a moralizing cover for what the United States really wants \u2014 which is regime change in Moscow.  Russia has suspected this all along.  Ironically, it sees the United States pretty much as the United States sees itself:  as a messianic power spreading the good news of democracy around the world.  Russia knows that if it had acquiesced to Ukraine\u2019s joining NATO, if it had been passive in allowing an opposing military alliance to push itself right up against its fence, then Russia would permanently lose its freedom of action and any claim to great power status.  It would have to fit pliantly into an American-designed world order.  It would have to go along with the U.S., rather than to present itself as an alternative to it.  Going back to Napoleon, Russia has a history of opposing hegemonic power bidders.  If it had gone along with NATO-on-the-Dneiper it would have prostrated itself to one.   It would become like Europe, another American appendage. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Russian people get this.  They sense that the battle in Ukraine is not just about Ukraine.  It in an existential fight, a struggle of life or death, between them and the West.  To them a challenge originating in the West has once again reared up to put Russia under overwhelming pressure.  They believe that losing this fight would not amount to just a setback from which Russia could later recover; it would be tantamount to Russia\u2019s losing its historical identity, not merely as a country but as a civilization, for Russia is a civilization culturally distinct from that of the West, and not, as many Westerners mistakenly believe, an un-democratized expanse on Europe\u2019s eastern edge.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

An American Thinker article by our friend, James Soriano.    The two camps differ not only on the cause of war, they have completely different world views as to how a system of sovereign states works.   Russian war policy is the epitome of a broader realist approach to international affairs:  states have interests, not friends, … Continue reading “Do Not Underestimate Russia’s Resolve”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[46],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1381","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-foreign-policy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1381","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1381"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1381\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1381"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1381"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1381"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}