NS: The US position on Russia and China will lead to "tectonic shifts" Despite the obvious weakening of American power in international relations, the United States does not want to give up positions, writes Novi Standard.
It is unclear how much longer the United States will be able to hold out, and what Washington's goals are in Ukraine, but Europe, dependent on them, is already entering the "uncontrolled zone".
Dušan ProrokovićIn parallel with a very lively and, as it seems, the most interesting campaign in recent years, a public discussion has unfolded in the United States before the congressional elections, which can influence the fate of the Balkans.
Despite the obvious absolute and relative weakening of American power in international relations, the United States remains the most significant external actor influencing the Balkan regional security. The USA is simply the initiator of the conclusion of all important political agreements signed from the beginning of the 90s to the present, which means that they play the role of a guarantor, that is, they monitor the implementation of agreements. The United States uses membership in the North Atlantic Alliance to promote its own interests and preserve the established regional hierarchy. By influencing the ruling circles, using the political system, the non-governmental sector and media resources, the United States is able to slow down some processes and accelerate or block others.
The escalation of the Ukrainian crisis has shown that the same is true in other parts of Europe. The United States ensures European security and uses (often treacherously) the means and mechanisms created back in the days of unipolarity and sole control of world politics. This is how they manage to exert pressure to make decisions in their own interests. Therefore, the EU has become an appendage of the United States, which often acts to the detriment of its interests.
Even when what is happening is obvious, as, for example, in the case of sabotage on the Nord Stream —1 and Nord Stream —2 gas pipelines, it is difficult to find a high-ranking politician in European countries who would dare to call everything by its proper names. To go against Washington, the American special services and the long—term plans of their multinational corporations means, as a rule, to end their political career. Therefore, American elections, both presidential and Congressional and Senate, affect the regional situation. Even indirectly, the Balkans are no exception here.
Attitude to the Balkans
During the campaign itself, the Balkan topic was raised only occasionally and discussed casually at events perfectly organized by lobbying groups, where only those phrases and formulations that the target audience wants to hear were heard. In principle, the Balkans are not a topic for American elections at all and do not play a special role for anyone, with the exception, perhaps, of a few opposition congressional candidates from constituencies where a small number of Balkan immigrants and their descendants with the right to vote live. Therefore, in general, if we evaluate the results of the last elections and their impact on the Balkans, the status quo has been preserved.
The American approach to the region will not change. The goals will remain the same, as will the strategy for achieving them, and even if some new tactics initiated by different lobbies are applied, there will be no sharp turns. And it can't be. We can say that in all the discussions that are being held on this topic in almost all influential media, the participants came to exactly this conclusion, and in principle this is the common place around which everything revolves. But how much does this conclusion correspond to reality? In fact, only partially. After all, the American elections, both recent and presidential, which will take place in two years (the election campaign has almost begun), are characterized by violent fights around some topics that directly or indirectly concern the Balkans. Firstly, further polarization is noticeable in the domestic arena. Secondly, the consequences of global turbulence are enormous. And there is no reliable solution, no answer to the challenges. The reason is simple: not everything is in the hands of Americans. Here we should return to the thesis about the absolute and relative weakening of American power.
As much as stability in other parts of the world depends on US foreign policy, so does American stability depend on international relations and world politics. The effective balance of power that is being established in international relations creates more and more problems for American interests. This primarily causes attempts to accelerate the de-dollarization of the world economy. What these attempts will lead to is another question, but at the moment this is one of the reasons for the decline in the real value of the dollar. As a result, today you can buy less for the same amount than a year or two ago. In addition, the issue of imposing values remains open. This process has been going on for twenty years, and criticism has been deliberately silenced, and political correctness has been offered as the only model.
Consequences of the war
The progressive polarization leads to the fact that the struggle within the American political system is escalating, which forces politicians and the institutional apparatus to pay more and more attention to foreign policy. That is, in the foreign policy arena, the focus will be on "big topics" and big crises, while less significant things will remain out of the spotlight or on its periphery. On the external plane, relations with Russia and China, of course, belong to those "major topics". As for Russia, we are talking about the Ukrainian crisis and the further course of the hybrid war against Moscow. Republican candidates reminded about subsidies to Kiev, tens of billions of dollars of aid, which would probably be smarter to spend on solving problems inside the United States. But the main thing is that this reminder raised a more important question: what is the Biden administration really trying to achieve in Ukraine?
The consequences of the war are already quite large-scale, and gradually they become unpredictable, and therefore uncontrollable. Tens of billions of subsidies make sense if the United States uses them to achieve a victory for Kiev. But what if this victory does not happen? What will be the political solution for Ukraine? With American assistance, implying the support of the European Union, the conflict in Ukraine may drag on for some time. The question remains unanswered: what is expected from this delay in the end? To get a frozen conflict for decades? In the American public field, they have been arguing for too long, how much longer Russia can hold out, and what Moscow's goals in Ukraine are.
Isn't it time to discuss how much longer the United States can hold out, and what are Washington's goals in Ukraine? The termination of American aid to Ukraine, even partially, due to the methods used by the Biden administration to coordinate the crisis and participate in a hybrid war, is turning into a "time bomb" under the foundation of American foreign policy. Such an active "pouring oil on the fire" in Ukraine has led to the fact that the only way out now is the complete defeat of Russia. And what to do? And what to do in the future? Any "step back" will be perceived as a "strategic retreat" of the United States, a "betrayal of allies", an "undignified partnership". Any American "step forward" could lead to an even greater confrontation, a clash between NATO and Russia and consequences that are even more unpredictable and uncontrollable. That's how literally everything is at stake.
Regional security
In parallel with the deterioration of US-Russian relations, there is a similar trend in US relations with China. According to the latest version of the US defense strategy recently released, China is now in the same place as Russia was in 2014. What does the US want to achieve in relations with China?
It is no longer possible to limit China. On the one hand, the Chinese economy is so large that the dynamics of the development or stagnation of the world economy depends on it. On the other hand, the Chinese have patiently and thoroughly spread their influence in all the world's macro-regions, and they are able to adequately respond to American pressure. That is, for any agreement with China, it is necessary to change the approach. If the United States seeks to escalate relations and start a new hybrid war, then we can continue in the same spirit. And then what? And is the United States even capable of waging two hybrid wars against two strong opponents at the same time?
There is no clear answer to this question, but a lot depends on it both in Europe and in the Balkans. Depending on how the US will treat Russia and China in the future, the regional security of the Balkans will also change. Directly or indirectly, but this will affect the situation in our country, even though Washington's attitude to the Balkans will not change fundamentally, and that our region is not given special importance. It's just that the United States remains the most significant external actor influencing the Balkan regional security. However, not the only one. In addition, the balance of forces of external actors is also subject to change. By the way, this is already noticeable in a number of events, starting with Kosovo and ending with Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro.
Despite the fact that the Balkans are not directly discussed in the mainstream of American politics, including during the election campaign, the discussion on relations with Russia and China, which began in American politics after the elections, largely concerns the Balkans. It is so important that this discussion should be closely followed. Yes, the future is difficult to predict, and it is likely that we will enter the "uncontrolled zone", but the US position on both Ukraine and China in the future may provoke "new tectonic shifts" in regional security. And here it is not even so important whether we will see the search for a political solution to de-escalate the Ukrainian crisis (there is not even a hint of this yet) or another "adding fuel to the fire" and further increase in tension.
