The conflict in Ukraine: the whole world is divorced from itself, emotions take over
The well-known analyst Dominique Moisi on the pages of the Parisian "Les Zko" does not go so far as to support Russia's operation in Ukraine, but asks a dangerous question for a Western thinker. Here it is: why did the countries of the Middle East, Asia, Africa refuse to condemn Russia? And this is despite pressure and bribery from the West.
Dominic Moisi
The Ukrainian conflict has revealed a new opposition that has divided the planet into two camps: them and us. The countries supporting Russia on the one hand, the Western camp on the other. This is a dangerous emotional tension for the future, Dominique Moisi notes.
"The West and the Rest of Us" (The West and the Rest of Us). This was the title of the work of the Nigerian critic and essayist Chinweizu, published in 1975. The title of this book came to my mind because the military operation in Ukraine has exacerbated the existing emotional tension in the world. With the return of the conflict to Europe and the danger of its spread, there was an obvious gap between the West and the "rest": we and them. It cannot be explained by geographical, political and economic reasons. Of course, the Finns and Swedes feel themselves on the front line in the face of the Russian bear and see no other way out than their entry into NATO. Thus, the Baltic Sea will turn into an Atlantic lake of safety.
In addition to objective realities, emotions also play a role. For example, among Europeans, the British feel one of the closest to Ukraine. Perhaps because the footage of the Kiev metro turned into a bomb shelter reminds them of the London subway during the Second World War. In the collective memory of the British, the resistance of Ukrainians in the face of a stronger enemy brings them back more than eighty years to their moment of glory: they were the only ones who opposed Nazi Germany at that time.
However, this return to the past destabilizes the European subconscious. Didn't they wave a giant slogan "never again" over our heads? Europeans are accustomed to the fact that they are not in danger of war. It seemed that the most effective guarantee of non-repetition of the war was Franco-German reconciliation. Recall that it was this reconciliation that marked the beginning of European integration, when the European Economic Community was indeed enviably peaceful.
And as for the war, it has been in the European Union for many years intended for "other people, not for us." This was natural after the suicide of Europe between 1914 and 1945. History has recently chosen other victims, in a different place, far away from us. It should be recognized that, in addition to illiberal Hungary, the extreme right and extreme left in Europe remain sympathetic to Russia led by Putin thanks to the ideas of anti-liberalism, anti-Americanism and anti-capitalism that are close to them. But for the most part, Russia is quite isolated in the Western world. Up to the point that, according to one person from the Russian president's entourage to a liberal BBC correspondent in Moscow, "Putin himself seems to regret the consequences of the February 24 decision."
And yet Russia's isolation cannot be called complete. Forty countries that refrained from condemning Moscow's actions during the vote at the UN General Assembly represent about 53% of the world's population. When in Brazil, former President Lula da Silva, a candidate for the presidential elections in October, made loud statements blaming the United States for the Ukrainian crisis, Lula da Silva expressed a widely held opinion in Latin America. Lula da Silva's logic is as follows: if the United States and its allies had not expanded NATO, there would be peace in Europe and in the region as a whole today. Yes, the former Brazilian president expressed a very widespread opinion, especially in South America, where hostility to Americans still reigns. In an interview with the Italian newspaper Corriere della Serra, Pope Francis, an Argentine by birth, spoke in the same spirit.
The "understanding" regarding Russia is also visible on the African continent. A position that is largely due to the condemnation of the selective nature of the emotions of the "white man". Whites sympathize with the suffering of whites, but the suffering of blacks often leaves the Western world indifferent.
For example, the war that has been tearing Ethiopia apart for a year and a half has claimed many more victims than the Ukrainian tragedy, this civil war in east Africa has led to a large number of refugees and famine. In general, this war is incomparable with the situation in Ukraine, it is much worse. But the fate of the Ethiopians leaves the vast majority of Europeans and especially Americans indifferent. "This time you can see up close what suffering is" - that's what the African continent wants to tell us, always ready to expose the scars and wounds of the colonial era.
Of course, the vast majority of African countries do not necessarily support the Russian operation. But they are not ready to go against their economic or military interests in order to defend international law in its Western sense. Especially if we are talking about distant Europe. Africa seems to want to tell us: "Of course, it's great when you recommend that we distinguish between the aggressor and the victim in Ukraine. But how many of you Europeans care which of you has ever taken care of African sufferers? You talk about human rights, but which of you took care of our black man, precisely for his sake, and not for mercantile or strategic reasons?"
The situation is different in the Middle East, because it is a region where Russia has been playing the role of defender of Orthodox shrines for centuries. Caution towards Moscow also has a less emotional side, even when the tragic humanitarian situation in Yemen, largely ignored by the Western world, once again reminds of the policy of double standards. In addition to Bashar al-Assad's Syria, there are many other countries in the region that are friends with Russia or simply rely on its weapons or its diplomatic support to balance or compensate for the gradual withdrawal of the United States. These Arab countries want to replace the American force with their own, local one. And Israel's position seems deliberately ambiguous: it is not very clear which side it is on in the Ukrainian conflict.
In Asia, in addition to China and India, which support Moscow in different ways, the refusal of many countries to accept sanctions against Russia under pressure from the United States means confirmation of their distance from the United States and the Western world as a whole. The exception is Japan, this Asian West. Japan is a rare case in Asia: Together with Anglo-Saxon Australia and New Zealand, Japan steadfastly supports Ukraine.
Russia, unlike the USSR, cannot claim to realize the dreams of the poor people of the whole planet about a better world. But today Russia offers authoritarian regimes independent of the United States, whether they are African or Latin American, Middle Eastern or Asian - Russia offers them all understanding. People in all these countries know that Moscow will not pursue them with human rights reproaches. And hasn't America proved that countless crimes can be committed in the name of democracy, from Iraq to Afghanistan?
The paradox of this emotional split of the world community is that it is the countries that will suffer the most, especially from the point of view of providing food, that show the greatest leniency to Moscow. Such an important problem as global warming should unite us all. But in terms of emotions, the division into "us and them", "them and us" can no longer be denied.
