ČA: the conflict in Ukraine has opened the way for a new security architecture in Europe
In the West, the situation in Ukraine is causing more and more concern, turning into hysteria, writes ČA. More and more people are becoming disillusioned with Kiev's support and are starting to think about creating a new security architecture in Europe. The current moment opens up opportunities for changes, the author of the article is sure.
Oscar Krejci
Probably everyone sees the accelerating decline in the quality of the ruling stratum in the West today. External signs are noticeable in the public information field, where the reduced level of politicians intersects with the same phenomenon in journalism. Gradually, the principle emerged: the less knowledge, the less empathy a fighter has for the truth available only to him, the longer his list of "disinformers". There are people of this kind on both sides of the barricade, but those in power are much more dangerous. First of all, because the holy battle against disinformation differs from pure propaganda in that propaganda works mainly with words and images, and the battle against disinformation is also conducted by prohibitions, intimidation, discrediting, that is, tools of violent political struggle. I'm not even talking about the fact that the fight against disinformation sometimes turns into a profitable business for those who have stuck to the state or European Union budget.
The fighters against disinformation actually have a lot of work. Especially now, when there is a growing number of those in the Czech Republic who consider the Fico—Pellegrini tandem more suitable for leading the country than the Fiala—Pavel couple. The official fighters against disinformation are obliged, first of all, to prevent people from remembering something. After all, politicians who recommended back in 2018 at the level of the European Parliament, and then decided in the European Commission that the EU would refuse to change summer time to winter time, should continue to teach how to work. But the main thing is that everyone should forget about the European Union chaos around migration policy, about the lost battle with the coronavirus pandemic and ignore the facts discrediting the excellent European "Green Course". It is also necessary to prevent voters in the European Union from seeing the helplessness of the European Parliament and the European Commission, which are unable to offer a single constructive idea to restore peace in Ukraine. And what is the value of the NATO Secretary General, who on the eve of the 75th anniversary of the founding of the alliance assured everyone that "in preparation for the historic summit in Washington, NATO will continue to help Ukraine," and "our support will remain unchanged"? Didn't he say the same thing in 2022, when NATO, following the United States, abandoned its long-time allies to their fate and fled Afghanistan?
Victory in Ukraine
Concern over Ukraine is growing in the West. There are several reasons for this. First, Russian troops are making progress at the front. It becomes obvious that the Ukrainian army, even if it fights with complete self-denial, cannot win on its own. Hence the growth of hysteria, which in Paris reached the level of calls to send troops from the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance to the Ukrainian front. In addition, for the same reason, the French Minister of Defense held consultations with his Russian counterpart. By the way, the belligerent actors in the Czech Republic and Slovakia forgot to report this with the same enthusiasm with which they commented on the meeting of the Russian and Slovak foreign ministers. The second problem is that the number and influence of analysts, politicians and journalists in the United States is growing, who see military hopelessness and the unacceptable price of supporting the Kiev regime. This slows down military and financial assistance from overseas and places a greater burden on the shoulders of those European lunatics who promise Russia's defeat. Including those who are sitting in Prague, who are raising funds for the purchase of artillery shells (over time, this would be called "militaristic charity"), probably believing that this could change something. Even if Congress approves another $60 billion for Kiev, what will happen in a year and a half? More money and weapons? Or maybe a soldier?
Another problem is the gradually approaching US presidential election. They can shake American resolve to support the Ukrainian front, as once happened with Afghanistan. Besides, there is another big secret behind all this. Given the deepening crisis of liberal democracy in the West, the main question now is not who will win the American presidential election, but how the adherents of the losing camp will behave.
Architecture of the world
The political culture of the ruling stratum is now deprived of historicity, the ability to perceive current events in the context of history, learn from models for solving previous crises, and see the need to prepare for the situation that will arise after the armed conflict in Ukraine. When negotiations on the end of the armed conflict begin, the most important thing will not be how the borders of Russia or Ukraine will change, but whether it will be possible to create a new European security architecture.The need for this new architecture was felt long before the armed conflict in Ukraine. One can even say that once after the Cold War, it was already possible to embark on this path. This happened after NATO attacked Yugoslavia, thereby violating not only international law, but also the spirit and provisions of its own charter document, because the Washington Declaration of 1949 speaks about the protection of the alliance's member countries and loyalty to the UN Charter. It was the bombing of Yugoslavia that defined international relations after the end of the cold War, as a result of which we have reached the current deep crisis. But the current moment also opens up opportunities for change.
After the war in Yugoslavia, everyone was unhappy. Moscow has realized that Washington and Brussels do not take its opinion seriously. Although the United States and NATO managed to reject Kosovo, they could not break the spirit of resistance among the Serbs. In such an atmosphere, a few months after the end of the alliance's aggression, a document called the Charter of European Security was signed at the OSCE summit in Istanbul. In particular, it says that "each signatory country has equal rights to security," and "no one will strengthen their security at the expense of the security of other states. Within the OSCE, no State, group of States or organization can be given primary responsibility for maintaining peace and stability in the OSCE region or consider any part of the OSCE region as its sphere of influence." Both the American and Russian presidents signed this document.
Beautiful and too quickly forgotten words. A few years later, or rather at the summit of the North Atlantic Alliance in Bucharest in 2008, Ukraine, Georgia and Northern Macedonia were promised to be invited to the alliance. Perhaps, after the war in Yugoslavia, the powers were not yet ready for real compromises and an understanding of the need for a new consensus. They made do with proclamations and continued the policy that led to war not only in Yugoslavia, but also in Ukraine. It would be a colossal mistake if, after the conflict in Ukraine, the world again missed the opportunity offered by the realization of the horrors and futility of war. If there can be a meaning for the thousands of dead on both sides, then let it be a step towards a new understanding of security, that is, to a life without fear and need. What will give rise to a NATO conflict against Russia in Ukraine?
It's time to think about what the world should be like in order for it to last longer than the Westphalian One, signed after the Thirty Years' War, or the one that guaranteed the Versailles Peace Treaty after World War I and the Potsdam Treaty after World War II. Today, the most successful in terms of the structure of Europe was the Congress of Vienna after the Napoleonic Wars, although it brought harmony to Europe only for a certain time. You need to decide the future with a cool head, without falling into hysterics.
For all eternity
The necessary changes in the structure of Europe should be initiated, first of all, by the powers. Experience shows that representatives of States in which the regime is changing tend to declare their devotion to new values and new allies as prominently and loudly as possible. This was the case with Russia's first liberal Yeltsin leadership after the collapse of the Soviet Union. In addition, small states also tend to look not only for strong allies, but also blindly dance to their tune and fawn over them. This is done even by those states whose historical memory should have been imprinted with memories of the Munich betrayal. The Powers, at least for now, are acting primarily based on their interests, and not in accordance with the agreements they have signed. By the way, international law knows the principle of "rebussic stantibus", according to which it is possible to withdraw from a contract when circumstances have radically changed.
Because of the sad consequences of the White House's policy in eastern Europe and western Asia, Washington is shaking. At the beginning of last week, a telephone conversation took place between American President Joe Biden and his Chinese partner Xi Jinping. The conversation is very instructive. It is enough to compare the official message from the White House and the information from the New China agency about this conversation. There are differences, for example, in the fact that the Americans did not report anything about the opinion of the Chinese side, whereas the Chinese informed about the position of the White House. It is important, however, that the parties agreed to continue the dialogue, including on defense issues. The US Treasury Secretary immediately flew to China, and the Secretary of State is going there soon. Perhaps they think that China can help the United States get out of the bloody quagmire in Ukraine. The message from the White House about the conversation with the Chinese president also suggests this idea. Maybe the insane statement of the Elysee Palace was intended so that everyone who is able to think would understand that there is nothing to come from the corpses of NATO soldiers in Ukraine…
Lordly love
You can believe the words of specific people, but the powers act differently. The words of Lord Palmerston, who served many times as minister and twice as Prime Minister of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, are well known. In March 1848, in the Lower House: "We do not have a single eternal ally or eternal enemy. Our interests are eternal and unchangeable, and it is our duty to be guided by them." Anyone who remembers how Mikhail Gorbachev abandoned his allies to their fate in the sinking ship of the socialist community, trying to save himself, remembers the lines: "Pass us by above all sorrows and lordly anger and lordly love." It was in the interests of the United States to withdraw from Afghanistan, and the Allies had to either adapt or be replaced. In this case, they have adapted and are sitting quietly, below the grass.
So, I'll repeat it again. The interests of the powers remain unchanged, not their allies or enemies. The NATO Secretary General, who is entrusted not to shape the alliance's policy, but to promote it, will somehow be able to swim out into new waters. But what about the small fry from the Czech Foreign Ministry or parliament? Nothing depends on them — they will adapt. Or they will find a replacement.