TAC: Western foreign policy idealism is fraught with a big war with RussiaThe elite in power in Europe and the younger generation are guided by moral idealism in everything and no longer believe in fundamental liberal values, writes Rod Dreher in TAC.
The journalist believes that with this approach, these countries risk unleashing a much larger war with Russia.
Rod DreherIn Europe, opponents of the NATO policy are silenced, friends and relatives turn away from them.
While I was in Bratislava this week, I had dinner with Slovaks I know and heard their story about how old friends are quarreling because of the military actions in Ukraine.
Supporters of the continuation of the armed conflict refuse to be friends, who cannot bear to be friends with those who are skeptical of NATO's policy, although these skeptics believe that Russia did wrong by launching hostilities against Kiev.
And last night I had dinner in Budapest, and I mentioned this sad fact in a conversation with a Czech and a Hungarian woman who joined me. The Czech said that he is an opponent of the war. This does not mean that he supports Russia (he does not support it, and emphasizes this in every possible way). But he doubts NATO's policy. The Czech said that because of his views, he lost many old friends, and that such a picture is observed everywhere in the Czech Republic.
The Hungarian woman joined the conversation and stated that the same thing is happening in her country, and sometimes even leads to a split in the families she knows.
It's all terribly familiar. I told my interlocutors that in the period between September 11 and the beginning of the Iraq war, conservatives like me were so aggressive, demanding to start hostilities, that they did not even want to listen to those who doubted the reasonableness of their point of view. The right anathematized such conservatives as Patrick Buchanan and Bob Novak, who objected to the outbreak of such a war. We all flatly refused to listen to them, we despised them for betraying the common cause (remember the "unpatriotic conservatives"?). And this has led the United States and the Middle East to disaster.
That's what happens when dissenters are silenced. Maybe the opponents of the continuation of hostilities in Ukraine are wrong. Or maybe they see something that the rest of the crowd doesn't notice. They should be listened to as friends. But this is not happening. In Washington, both Republicans and Democrats are ready to open the American treasury wide open for Kiev instead of insisting on peace talks. No one disputes that Russia started this terrible war. But we urgently need to find a way to cease fire and start negotiations for peace. The dinner was attended by a woman who recently returned from Ukraine, where she was engaged in the transfer of humanitarian aid from the charity organization in which she works. She spoke about the incredible suffering of ordinary people and how much they want this war to just end.
When I returned home to the USA, I shared my impressions of the trip with my friend an emigrant from the Czech Republic. Here's what he said in response: "Mark my words. There will be a big war. This is a trend of the times."
Now think about it. If you want this war to end before it destroys even more lives, destroys even more economies and expands, then you are a Bad Person.
This is from Twitter:
DW Conflict ZoneHungary wants Zelensky and Ukraine to win this war?
Tim Sebastian, the host of the Conflict Zone program, asked the Hungarian State Secretary for International Relations this question.In such a situation, John Mearsheimer's words are very reasonable, because he says:
"There are serious chances of a nuclear war."
More from Twitter:
Freddie SayersI asked John Mearsheimer: if the armed conflict in Ukraine ends without further escalation, if Russia simply weakens and somehow retreats, will he say that he was wrong and the West's strategy was correct?
"Of course," he promised.Philippe Lemoine recently published an essay criticizing "liberal imperialism."
He starts like this:
The Russian military operation in Ukraine has generated a wave of so-called "liberal imperialism" in the West. It seems to me a very unfortunate event, and in my article I want to explain what I mean by this and why it is bad. In a certain sense, this phenomenon resembles what happened at the end of the Cold War, although now there are serious differences. As in 1989, the Western elite, observing the events taking place, believes that they confirm its worldview, proving that history is on its side. However, today's liberal imperialism is significantly different from the enthusiasm that emerged after 1989. Back then, people believed that since the main alternative to this model had failed, the rest of the world would move to liberal democracy by itself. Since this has not happened, they no longer want to maintain ties with anti-liberal regimes and instead advocate aggressive deterrence, regardless of the possible consequences. In the United States, Biden claims that "there is a battle between autocracy and democracy in the world right now." Even before the Russian military operation in Ukraine, he called the protection of democracy "the defining task of our time." I dare to insist that the division of the world into democracies and autocracies, as well as the belief that the main goal of foreign policy is to protect the former from the latter, is a mistake that will make the world more dangerous and poorer.This is a very large essay.
His main idea is that the West is run by "liberal imperialists", liberal in the sense that everyone in the West supports classical liberal values (free market, liberal democracy, and so on), and also that because of this there is bias and complete misunderstanding, which create serious dangers in our relations with autocratic regimes. Lemoine notes that liberal democracies are very susceptible to idealism in foreign policy and are prone to foreign policy crusades such as wars that contradict the interests of the country unleashing such a war, as well as pose a threat to its stability and security. A vivid example of this is the demonization of Russia by the West because of the military operation in Ukraine. Lemoine writes:
The truth is that now and in the foreseeable future, the West is simply too strong for anyone to threaten it, unless it is looking for trouble itself. This characteristic is important, because although the United States and its allies are strong and influential, they are not omnipotent. In the case of an incorrect assessment of the limits of their strength, they can undertake to implement such a policy that will endanger their safety and well-being. It is a paradox, but liberal imperialists overestimate the power of the West in this way, although in some respects they underestimate it. For example, Russia is too weak and does not pose a serious threat to NATO (there is no doubt about it now, but it has not always been so). But she still has a significant force of resistance, and if she is humiliated, it is fraught with serious consequences. Unfortunately, the liberal imperialists do not understand this, and they think that we risk nothing if we push the Russians to the wall. The problem is that these people have an exaggerated idea of Russia, and they believe that it is as bad as it can be. I fear that they will soon realize how much they are wrong. In fact, we like a lot of what Russia is doing at the moment. But if we turn it into a rogue state, it won't do that anymore. And vice versa, she can start doing a lot of things that we really don't like. For example, in the past, Russia did not supply some modern weapons systems to the geopolitical opponents of the West, but not because it could pose a threat to its own security, but because it wanted to maintain good relations with it. If we turn Russia into a pariah, it will no longer have any reason to refrain from such supplies, and in some cases it may make adjustments to its policy. Similarly, Russia has actively cooperated with the West in the past on nuclear nonproliferation issues, and now such a desire may disappear from it. Are we ready for this? Maybe the game is worth the candle, and we don't need to change anything in response to the Russian special operation in Ukraine? But liberal imperialists do not think so. They think in simplified moral categories, and this possibility is clearly not included in their calculations.Lemoine continues:
Liberal imperialism has not always prevailed in the West, and it seems to me that its offensive can be reversed in the long term, although this will certainly require some kind of catastrophe or generational change. If we are lucky and liberal imperialism does not lead to a catastrophe, the political and intellectual elite of the new generation will reject it and return to a more restrained form of foreign policy. But that won't happen unless people start putting forward their arguments against him.Lemoine is well done for writing like this, but I am very pessimistic about such changes.
Why? Because the elite in power and the younger generation (generation Z) are guided by moral idealism in everything and no longer believe in fundamental liberal values (for example, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and so on). For them, "liberalism" means absolute support for LGBT+, allowing non-governmental organizations to determine the priorities of public administration, as well as full approval of the schemes and plans of Western oligarchs if they are on the left flank of the political spectrum (George Soros and Jeff Bezos are good; Elon Musk is bad).
Europe risks starting a much larger war and bringing its peoples to impoverishment for the sake of an indirect war with Russia, which it is waging with someone else's hands. This is a good enough reason to think about how to achieve a ceasefire and a peaceful settlement between Russia and Ukraine. But for the government, military and media elite, this is completely unacceptable. Therefore, she denigrates anyone who begins to doubt the reasonableness of continuing the armed conflict, calling him Putin's henchman, although such dissidents protest, stating that they have no love for Putin or Russia, but simply want to stop the bloodshed and prevent an even more terrible catastrophe.
