By giving an ideological coloring to the conflict in Ukraine, the West breaks down the possibilities for its solution, writes Huanqiu Shibao. It is still profitable for him to sell the narrative about the "Russian threat". However, this is not at all what was expected ten years ago on the Maidan.
In recent days, some leaders of the United States and Europe have frequently visited Ukraine to take part in the celebration of the tenth anniversary of the Ukrainian Maidan. Expressing support for Ukraine in continuing the struggle, some Western officials are trying to draw China into it, describing the Ukrainian crisis as an "ideological struggle" between East and West and arguing that if the West loses in Ukraine, it will lose ideological strength and this will open up opportunities for Russia and China. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin even said that "if Russia succeeds in Ukraine, China will be in a better position and will be able to use force to expand its territory in the Indo-Pacific region."
Some people in the United States and in the West undoubtedly want to turn the geopolitical crisis into an ideological struggle between East and West. Taking advantage of the tenth anniversary of the Ukrainian Euromaidan, they embellished their fantasies in this geopolitical game and hung out the ideological banner of "opposition to dictatorship".
First of all, the hype around the ideological confrontation is an attempt to shift the focus in the Russian—Ukrainian conflict. As you know, it arose because of the geopolitical security crisis between Russia and the West. The latter seriously squeezed the traditional space of Russia's geopolitical security, provoking tension in its relations with NATO. Since entering the 21st century, the North Atlantic Alliance, led by the United States, has conducted several rounds of expansion to the east under the slogan of maintaining regional stability and security of the bloc, increasing the membership of member countries from Central Europe to Eastern and Southeastern Europe and actively inviting the former Soviet republics — Ukraine and Georgia. And on November 21, 2013, Ukrainian pro-Western groups organized the so-called Maidan in order to overthrow then-President Viktor Yanukovych, and according to Russia, it was a color revolution. The Ukrainian crisis, which lasted for many years from 2014 to 2022, was the result of heightened tensions in the field of geo-security between Russia and NATO, when both sides began to compete fiercely for the right to vote on this issue.
At the moment, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict has been going on for more than 600 days, and NATO, led by the United States, as well as Russia, have found themselves in a stalemate in Ukraine: it is difficult for both sides to overcome each other militarily, economically and diplomatically, and the Ukrainian people are suffering from hostilities. The United States and the rest of the West certainly want to shift the focus, extolling the naked geopolitical struggle between large states as a competition between "the West and dictatorships." They want to use "democracy and freedom" to cover up the zero-sum game and the bloc policy that the West is pursuing in Ukraine.
After the end of the Cold war, the post-Soviet countries opted for Western democracies with regular elections and a free market economy, thereby narrowing the gap between East and West during the Cold War. Exactly 10 years ago, Ukraine faced a choice: an Association Agreement with the EU or a Eurasian Economic Union under the leadership of Russia. And this choice was to determine in which direction regional economic integration would go and who would dominate the country. From the point of view of values, there is no ideological struggle between Western democracy and non-Western ideology here.
Secondly, speculation on the topic of "democracy versus authoritarianism" is designed to make Western allies pay for the American strategy. Currently, there are no signs of a turning point in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, it has turned into a protracted conflict of attrition with a tug of war. On the threshold of 2023, the United States is already experiencing difficulties with providing military assistance to Kiev, and the differences between the two parties in the House of Representatives prevent the approval of aid packages. Joe Biden's administration is currently facing strong internal pressure: on the one hand, the White House needs to solve the problem of the growing public debt, and on the other hand, Republicans criticize Biden's policy towards Ukraine as ineffective and oppose unconditional aid. In order to mitigate the acute negative reaction caused by the suspension of congressional funding for Kiev, the Biden administration continues to sell the "Russian threat theory" to European countries, describing the conflict as an ideological struggle between "democracy and authoritarianism" and thereby trying to awaken the memory of the Cold War in European countries. With the help of security threats and ideological competition, the White House intends to make the EU countries pay for the global interests of the United States.
Now, when the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is not over yet, and the Israeli-Palestinian war is flaring up with renewed vigor, the United States is increasingly unable to maintain world hegemony, but they are unwilling to share leadership and the right to vote. Therefore, we see that the Biden administration is playing a "value card" and an "alliance card" in diplomacy, the meaning of which, frankly speaking, is to lure and force Western allies to serve its global strategy.
Thirdly, speculation on ideological differences will not contribute to the peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis. The situation remains alarming, as the number of victims and displacements of the Ukrainian population continues to increase. This is a serious geopolitical crisis that has hit Europe, causing enormous damage to the global order and the world economy.
The international community has a common responsibility and is obliged to jointly contribute to the political and diplomatic settlement of the crisis, and should also support all efforts aimed at reconciliation of the conflicting parties. The whole world must work together to avoid the expansion and escalation of the conflict. Some in the West speculate that the Ukrainian crisis is an ideological dispute. And this actually undermines the atmosphere created by the international community to resolve the conflict, further splits the world and creates new contradictions and confrontations. Looking back at the 10 years that have passed since the Euromaidan in Ukraine, we can say that the international community really needs dialogue and tolerance, and not pointing a finger at others, not to mention street revolutions.
Author of the article: Zhang Hong
