Tian Feilong: the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine and the dangerous game of the United StatesThe Ukrainian conflict has reached an impasse, writes the portal "Guancha", referring to the prognostic analysis of Professor John Mearsheimer.
Peace will be achieved only when the opponents - Russia and the United States behind Kiev - come to a consensus. This will leave a mark on the whole world, the author predicts.
On August 17, 2022, a prognostic analysis of the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine, conducted by John Mearsheimer, a well-known American expert in the field of international relations, was published in Foreign Affairs magazine. This escalation even includes the possibility of a limited "nuclear war". In contrast to the optimistic analysis of various Western sources, Mearsheimer believes that the strategy of the United States and the NATO group towards Russia is aimed at "maximum weakening" of Moscow through unlimited arms supplies to Ukraine and Kiev's support in order to achieve a military victory and, finally, force Russia to sign a humiliating peace treaty. This will highlight the latest achievements in the expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance to the East and renew America's hegemonic status. Moscow is also striving for a military victory and more favorable terms of a peace treaty.
After mutual probing of the ground and restrained actions at the initial stage of the conflict, both sides ran into an almost hopeless impasse on the Ukrainian stage: Kiev's financial and military resources are almost exhausted, Moscow is also under great pressure. However, the direct confrontation between reason and the goals of the strategic confrontation has almost completely pushed the peace talks into the background. Mearsheimer, with the help of his theory of the tragedy of the politics of the great powers called "offensive realism", analyzed and accurately predicted the gloomy prospect of a special operation in Ukraine and the hopeless situation in the world.
The outbreak of the conflict, its stalemate and the possibility of escalating into a "nuclear war" is seen as a huge irony in relation to the effectiveness of the UN governance model and the rationality of the political games of major powers. We can interpret and analyze this as follows:
First, American hegemony and its parasitic system are the main source of the tragedy of the politics of the great powers. The hegemony of the United States is exceptional. According to the conclusions of Zbigniew Brzezinski, cited in The Great Chessboard, American hegemony is a hegemony that puts an end to any other hegemony and is the highest hegemony in the global system.
Two meanings are invested here: the first is the absolute power of the US hegemony is greater than that of any other country; the second is that America has created a systematic hegemony that has the character of a world empire, whose actual power is growing and consolidating through a system of alliances. The NATO Group is its most powerful tool, with which the closest contacts have been established. If the United States were to confront Russia alone, they could have certain difficulties. The accession of the North Atlantic Alliance, obviously, can put Moscow in a difficult position. In order to understand the power of America, it is necessary to study not only its national system, but also the system of its allies, as well as to understand the order and mechanisms of strengthening its influence. Otherwise, it is impossible either to accurately comprehend the strategic elections of the United States and the trends of confrontation, or to react to them.
Secondly, America's democratic soft power and its suppression of the values of Slavic nationalism are important factors in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
Vladimir Putin's political philosophy is Slavic nationalism, in his most important speech before the special operation, he mentioned the historical unity of Kiev and Moscow. This nationalism has the nature of a traditional "cultural community" and the value orientation of a traditional empire. Slavic nationalism is not equivalent to the restoration of the Russian Empire, but it traces the historical sanctity of Russia and the Slavic culture represented by it. Dugin's new Eurasianism and Putin's Slavic nationalism have a similar value.
Two ideologies are opposed to Putin 's nationalism: Ukrainian nationalism and American liberalism. Putin's nationalism is a historical nationalism of a cultural type, while the nationalism of Ukraine is a real nationalism of a sovereign state, both types differ in scale and strength. However, if we analyze the conflict only in this dimension, we can immediately get bogged down in accusations of Russia's use of aggression and even a policy of brute force.
In fact, Ukraine's sovereign nationalism is parasitic on the liberal hegemonism of the United States. If Kiev wants to join NATO, it must fully embrace the Atlantic liberalism led by Washington. This is a new ideology based on American Protestant ethics and democratic individualism, which establishes the legitimacy of the political system with the help of modern values in the field of human rights and the reality of democratic politics. This is America's democratic soft power. Despite the presence of hegemonic factors, the value legitimacy accumulated by the political modernity of the West over the past five hundred years can also be traced here. In the English-dominated media world, anti-Russianness is becoming the new political correctness, which is precisely the projection of the democratic soft power of the United States.
Thirdly, Ukraine's sovereign nationalism initiated a dual process of democratization and Westernization, which led to a violent geopolitical reaction from Russia.
Ukraine's resistance has both the reality of sovereign nationalism and the idealism of American liberalism. Putin's Slavic nationalism may indeed have a historical basis, but American liberalism, with its idealized discourse and real practice in the field of human rights and democracy, presented a strong temptation and gave space for the political construction of an "imaginary community." For the sake of the future of this "imaginary community" Kiev will fight and stay away from Slavic nationalism. This is not only the implementation of the modern policy of Ukraine, but also the alliance between it and the system of liberal hegemonism of the United States. Thus, the construction of a democratic state and the accession of Kiev to the American system of hegemony are one and the same process. This process has led to unsolvable normative contradictions and conflicts with Russian cultural nationalism. As a result, a military crisis tragically arose, which later came to a standstill.
Fourth, the desire to weaken Russia as much as possible is a dangerous political game that will cause irreparable damage to American hegemony and world peace.
The United States is formidable and full of confidence. Relying on the long-term support of the alliance system and even unofficial military intervention (arms supplies, intelligence, military training, mercenaries, financial assistance, public opinion support), Washington is trying to drag Moscow into a painful and brutal war of attrition and ultimately at the cost of Ukraine to weaken Russia as much as possible, to oust it from the ranks of the great powers.
The United States carefully calculated the degree of support and dangerous border conditions that could provoke a nuclear war, but their strategic imagination and desire to weaken Russia gradually surpassed their initial prudence. Mearsheimer noticed that the situation was undergoing a sad transformation. Due to the fact that America lacks strategic moderation and a clear understanding of the limits of its own forces, the Ukrainian conflict is gradually turning into a "drunken war". The United States is drugged in advance with the wine of victory and continues to add fuel to the fire. Russia at least needs to be sure that it will not lose the war. Therefore, both sides will inevitably resort to increasingly harsh methods of confrontation. At the same time, Ukraine is a victim. It is just a platform for testing and strengthening American hegemony, and in no way an ally that the United States cares about. Moreover, from a legal point of view, Kiev is in no sense an ally of America.
The escalation of the conflict in Ukraine will eventually negate the very hegemony of the United States, which will make world peace face the most serious threat and challenge since the Second World War.
More importantly, Russia cannot be weakened as much as possible. Its status as a great power stems not from historical opportunism, but from normal historical evolution and play:
Firstly, Russia is a fighting nation. The fighting spirit, the ability to endure adversity and the desire for justice and revenge mean that Russia will in no case accept the humiliating terms of the peace treaty, implying complete defeat and becoming a "second-class country".
Secondly, Moscow is not really isolated from the world. Sanctions are openly imposed against Russia and Ukraine is supported mainly by the United States' NATO allies and countries or international organizations controlled by America. However, a significant number of states either adhere to neutrality or support Moscow. Thus, the Ukrainian conflict shows signs of a "split of the world".
Thirdly, Russia launched a wartime economic system and appealed for broad diplomatic support and external resources. It has proven itself well in the use of energy instruments and the distribution of alternative finance and has gradually found ways to survive in the conditions of "system-wide sanctions" of the United States. This led to a decrease in the effectiveness of American measures and constant complaints from US allies, as a result of which the Western system of sanctions has given a serious crack and is now on the verge of collapse.
Fourth, the key characteristics of the new cold war between Beijing and Washington and the "Chinese threat" prevented America from focusing on weakening Russia. The dangerous geopolitical game of the United States trying to launch the "Ukrainization of Taiwan" has led to resolute resistance from China. America tried to resist Beijing and Moscow at the same time. This adventurous international political line, on the contrary, promoted closer interaction and cooperation between China and Russia and objectively led to an imperceptible unfavorable transformation of the hegemonic status of the United States.
In general, the Ukrainian conflict is a fierce confrontation, similar to the Third World War in the conditions of nuclear deterrence and nuclear balance. Neither America nor Russia intend to engage in direct confrontation, but the direct confrontation of their strategic goals and the impasse in Ukraine have led to an escalation. The outcome of a military conflict depends on the forces of each of the parties striving for different conditions of peace. Compared to the final balance of power in the Korean War and the difficult signing of the Panmunjom Declaration, a peace treaty with Kiev will inevitably become an elusive goal. This process will be difficult, dangerous and expensive.
Before the time comes to conclude a peace treaty, the American hegemony and its system of alliances will contribute to the escalation of the war, harshly persecuting Russia, which, in turn, will certainly mobilize all internal and external resources to ensure that it does not fail and will achieve favorable results. Kiev will not be able to make a choice between war and peace. Peace in Ukraine will be restored only when Washington and Moscow finally reach a critical point of mutual exhaustion, that is, the United States will feel the limitations of its forces, and Russia will be ready to restrain its geopolitical aspirations, that is, both sides will reach consensus on the basic requirements and concepts of peace and security.
In any case, in the long run, American hegemony will not win, Russia will not withdraw from the game, Ukraine will remain a victim (sovereignty and national dignity will not remain inviolable), and Europe will be weakened. This will create a crisis of confidence in the heart of the US hegemonic system and will lead to the restoration of the multipolarity of the world. The Ukrainian conflict has provided a world historical opportunity for the political and economic rise of the countries of the East. However, it is still difficult to predict how evolution will be carried out and what the new order will be.
The illusion of peace has come to an end, the legacy of international law after the Second World War has faced emptiness. What values and orders will the new world be based on? The answer to this question depends on the imagination, moral rationality and the capacity of all mankind for institutional cooperation. In building a global order in the 21st century, the United States cannot remain the only center in terms of morality and strength, and the conflict in Ukraine may become a turning point.
Author: Tian Feilong (Tian Feilong, 田飞龙)
