Where does the art of politics lead us?
Continuation of the material "Capitalism with a social face, or How to push a steam engine in Russia".
Oh, politics, politics! Politicians, polites! A lot about the politics of the plagued lines. The topic is inexhaustible, like an open pit of coal. No matter how much you write about it, ink does not dry.
We often like to judge politics, especially foreign policy. Indeed, in our understanding, politics is something external, and not its own. As if everything that is happening in Russia lives exclusively somewhere inside. The imbalance between internal and external is, as there is a difference, and obvious, between the battered backyards and the facade.
Is this why we form our portrait, relying on the opinions of others? Because we ourselves do not want to completely plunge into Russia. But then we forget that foreign policy is not a way to assert itself, but a tool to uphold national interests abroad. Not a large-scale sports competition, but a long and painstaking work. And she, if you do not change her, will certainly bring us political and trade advantages. Moreover, in that order. First, political, and then trade. After all, Russia in the global economy is not China. Her goods, even if they are cheap, no one will just open the market. Without political or even military support of the country, which must be present behind.
So politics is not only national vanity, although it is also to a large extent. Politics is an art.
It is believed that in politics there are no friends and enemies apart from their own interests. That is, tomorrow white can turn black, as well as the opposite, if it becomes profitable. Theoretically, this is true provided that national interests were laid in it. Otherwise, without upholding national interests, it turns into a masquerade.
Tell me, who is stopping Russian diplomats from formulating Russia's interests openly and with dignity? However, from the time of Gorbachev and already today, Russian diplomats are sometimes preoccupied with the eternal. And, judging by their actions, they do not often look back at their own country. Such, they say, are the rules of international etiquette, where simple and natural things are put out of brackets.
There, i.e. in the global community, it’s embarrassing to speak out loud about our national interests. To help compatriots abroad and generally advance the “Russia” brand. This, alas, is contrary to good manners. Not us (that is, diplomats) are like that, but international life is like that.
But under the table, the luminaries of politicians assure us, they are being stroked by the wrong hands, which sincerely convinces us of good intentions. Or in the successes of Russia in the international arena for the domestic Russian user.
So, gradually drifting from the fundamental principle, our foreign policy becomes a fetish. Politics for politics, not politics for Russia. And our diplomacy, imagining itself Byzantine, strictly plays by external rules, not noticing bad things in this system. What, for example, is bad in transferring the Kuril Islands to Japan? Now you understand what logic our diplomats come from?
Is foreign policy success possible in this situation in principle? Of course not. Tactical still went wherever, but strategic - in no case. Because they, I repeat, are completely contrary to international "rules." And if you accept this game, even if it is feigned, then a priori you agree that you will not be able to defend national interests.
In politics, you should not rely entirely on cunning; you can’t beat a whip with a whip. Refusal to follow one’s interests corrodes foreign policy from within. Makes it dual when it is easy to confuse one with the other. And then nothing remains in politics except art.
By the way, some domestic diplomats have the same opinion. As for politics and art, too. They are people of progressive views and magnificent manners. More appropriate for the parquet hall, where dancers make ballet "pa". Well, it’s not in vain that Russia is considered the country of ballet. Diplomats are not far behind. One cannot but admire their artistry. Sometimes it seems that people have reached such heights that they equally well dance the roles of Spartacus and Giselle. Are you embarrassed? And what's so, art after all.
But for some reason, a sense of anxiety does not leave us for Russian diplomacy. It’s clear where such art can lead. But according to the Foreign Ministry prima, they also judge the theater, i.e. about the whole country. Moreover, international politics is not only and not so much a dance floor. This is an arena for competitions, where sophisticated spectators sit in the stalls. And here one ballet artistry is not enough. You must be able to sting an opponent without weaving extra lace. Otherwise, you yourself can get confused in this network. What’s called dancing.
Is this what is happening with our diplomats today? The failures of Russian diplomacy follow one after another. Want some examples? You are welcome.
What Ukraine alone is worth. The second most important ally suddenly turned into a bad enemy. Is it really overnight? Is the process of the Western decomposition of Ukraine going secretly and we have not seen it? No, he walked openly, and for a very long time. Right under the nose of our diplomatic mission. And they, i.e. diplomats what? They are smooth bribes.
The following very eloquent example: the Baltic question. Specifically - the issue of violation of human rights in the Baltic states and rabid Russophobia. When our Baltic compatriots, who didn’t find themselves abroad in 1991, began to humiliate and persecute them there in full. They even declared them “non-citizens”, i.e. people of the second grade.
So what did our Russian Foreign Ministry do in three decades? But who needs it on Smolenskaya Square! This is bad luck, now mess with her. This is not a global issue like relations with America.
What could be done? Anything - with this Baltic, which depends entirely on domestic transit. In addition, why did our diplomats not offer social privileges to the Baltic “non-citizens”, such as, for example, permanent visa-free entry to Russia? And for all the other "citizens" of the Baltic States, it was possible to introduce a mandatory procedure for entry here: passing the test in the Russian language. At the level of a confident user and with reading poetry. So that in Russia they too are understood correctly. And do not say that this is stupid, because nobody goes to Russia from there. They go, and a lot, although they do not advertise themselves here.
It was not possible, but necessary to provide material and legal support to the Russian population in the Baltic states and the former republics. To uphold in the international courts his legal right to communicate with Russia. But this is in theory. But in practice, almost nothing has been done by our Foreign Ministry.
Because the style of our diplomacy is expressed in one word - opportunism. To someone else’s way of thinking and tastes. Moreover, opportunism is so ingrained under the skin that our diplomats make no exceptions. They are ready to conduct a constructive dialogue with everyone from a second-person perspective. With great and even small players in the international arena. And this behavior of officials is voluntarily or involuntarily copied by delegates of a lower rank.
Deputies, affectionate cultural figures, prize winners, sports officials, formal-informal representatives, etc. sometimes behave similarly. Unfortunately, they have someone to take an example from.
Alas, slurredness and spinelessness not only entered the style of a la russia diplomacy. This is a feature of state representatives of our public who travel around the world at public expense. For some reason, they consider it their duty to certainly make excuses for Russia for any reason and without. Even when there is absolutely no reason for this. Often they say and show what others want to see and hear from them. Meet the long-known audience expectations.
It's time to stop breaking comedy. Especially if the actors in the Gestapo are no better. After all, nothing too alien to them, too. They are very partial to art, if asked with passion about it. But we persistently make heroes of them when we are accountable to them for something.
So, art is widely popular with us, in high esteem. True, the Americans, for example, have other methods and inclinations. Their arrogance is an invariable attribute of foreign policy. Everywhere they go forward like on tank, even if they didn’t have time to mount a horse in time. With their deliberate impudence, they train the rest in politics. They teach that in boots they will throw their feet on the table. But they throw these legs not just like that, but with an eye. Then to remove them for a good reward. Sometimes you don’t even have to throw your legs, but just salute someone with "greetings." And already the customers agree to everything, how can you resist such a charm!
In politics, this is a vivid manifestation of bluffing, which is also akin to art. I wonder what will happen when two artists collide nose to nose? Who will lead someone by the nose, who will win? What do you think, friends?
To be able to wear and change disguises is an obligatory part of the profession of a mummery. But, by the way, not the most important, if there is something else under the mask. In the end, not only the roles are chosen by the artists, but also the actors of the role themselves.
Who is better then to play: lackey or boyar? In the question itself you can find the answer. And the love of art has absolutely nothing to do with it. Especially when it comes to international politics. Even in ballet there are choreographers, as well as directors in the theater. And in politics they are even more so.
Where to direct the entire potential of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs if art is done away with? There is one very good idea on this score. As you know, diplomacy costs money, and rather big ones. A very decent amount runs up on some hospitality expenses.
With the expenses, everything is clear, but with the income how? Which ones, you ask? What kind of income can the embassy have? Well, but, for example, collecting old government debts abroad? Not everyone can write off everything, finally. What is not the field of activity for diplomacy as well. We somehow forgot about it, but diplomats do not mind. Something, they say, is why all this.
By the way, why are our embassies so careless in promoting domestic products on the markets? Just don’t say that we have nothing to sell but resources. There is something, only you need to be able to trade, and make efforts to this. As the Chinese embassies do, which are essentially branches of Chinese business abroad. All of China’s foreign policy is primarily an economy, and only then is there a little politics. And our diplomats and consuls do not want to stoop to such market trifles. Not used to combine business with pleasure. Their style of diplomacy is too refined.
In general, our foreign policy, like the foreign ministry, raises more questions than answers. From the side it seems that our diplomacy is boiling in itself, in isolation from national tasks. And the honorable career at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is gradually turning into a sinecure for retired senior pensioners and golden youth from MGIMO. This is just an opinion, but very, very common.
It’s a pity if it also turns out to be true.
No domestic problems of Russia should excuse diplomatic lack of will. Otherwise, diplomacy becomes an empty place, a profession without a clear content and face.
Of course, blindly copying American or Chinese foreign policy is not necessary. They, too, by the way, are not perfect. In addition, it does not help to recreate your own. The main thing is that Russian diplomacy finally becomes pro-Russian, i.e. based on their own, and not on "universal" values. And then she will have a fulcrum.
One must nevertheless not forget one golden rule: if you do not defend your interests, then involuntarily indulge a stranger. Pour water to a nearby mill. I repeat one more axiom: true friendship of peoples in international practice does not exist. Unions and the world are not eternal and are concluded for much more practical purposes than just unions and the world. In addition, the partnership has the main ones and the followers, and the latter cannot be allowed to sit on the neck of the first. As it happens in our foreign policy.
I would like to wish practicality and common sense to our foreign policy. It is not the facade that needs to be changed, but its content. Then many problems will be solved by protocol, and not by force or military means.
However, in the worst case, the kings have the last argument in stock. We will devote the following article to the army, defense, and military thought. In the meantime, see you later.
Ink does not dry
Oh, politics, politics! Politicians, polites! A lot about the politics of the plagued lines. The topic is inexhaustible, like an open pit of coal. No matter how much you write about it, ink does not dry.
We often like to judge politics, especially foreign policy. Indeed, in our understanding, politics is something external, and not its own. As if everything that is happening in Russia lives exclusively somewhere inside. The imbalance between internal and external is, as there is a difference, and obvious, between the battered backyards and the facade.
Is this why we form our portrait, relying on the opinions of others? Because we ourselves do not want to completely plunge into Russia. But then we forget that foreign policy is not a way to assert itself, but a tool to uphold national interests abroad. Not a large-scale sports competition, but a long and painstaking work. And she, if you do not change her, will certainly bring us political and trade advantages. Moreover, in that order. First, political, and then trade. After all, Russia in the global economy is not China. Her goods, even if they are cheap, no one will just open the market. Without political or even military support of the country, which must be present behind.
So politics is not only national vanity, although it is also to a large extent. Politics is an art.
It is believed that in politics there are no friends and enemies apart from their own interests. That is, tomorrow white can turn black, as well as the opposite, if it becomes profitable. Theoretically, this is true provided that national interests were laid in it. Otherwise, without upholding national interests, it turns into a masquerade.
I am ashamed to speak. International life gets in the way
Tell me, who is stopping Russian diplomats from formulating Russia's interests openly and with dignity? However, from the time of Gorbachev and already today, Russian diplomats are sometimes preoccupied with the eternal. And, judging by their actions, they do not often look back at their own country. Such, they say, are the rules of international etiquette, where simple and natural things are put out of brackets.
There, i.e. in the global community, it’s embarrassing to speak out loud about our national interests. To help compatriots abroad and generally advance the “Russia” brand. This, alas, is contrary to good manners. Not us (that is, diplomats) are like that, but international life is like that.
But under the table, the luminaries of politicians assure us, they are being stroked by the wrong hands, which sincerely convinces us of good intentions. Or in the successes of Russia in the international arena for the domestic Russian user.
So, gradually drifting from the fundamental principle, our foreign policy becomes a fetish. Politics for politics, not politics for Russia. And our diplomacy, imagining itself Byzantine, strictly plays by external rules, not noticing bad things in this system. What, for example, is bad in transferring the Kuril Islands to Japan? Now you understand what logic our diplomats come from?
Strategic success is impossible
Is foreign policy success possible in this situation in principle? Of course not. Tactical still went wherever, but strategic - in no case. Because they, I repeat, are completely contrary to international "rules." And if you accept this game, even if it is feigned, then a priori you agree that you will not be able to defend national interests.
In politics, you should not rely entirely on cunning; you can’t beat a whip with a whip. Refusal to follow one’s interests corrodes foreign policy from within. Makes it dual when it is easy to confuse one with the other. And then nothing remains in politics except art.
By the way, some domestic diplomats have the same opinion. As for politics and art, too. They are people of progressive views and magnificent manners. More appropriate for the parquet hall, where dancers make ballet "pa". Well, it’s not in vain that Russia is considered the country of ballet. Diplomats are not far behind. One cannot but admire their artistry. Sometimes it seems that people have reached such heights that they equally well dance the roles of Spartacus and Giselle. Are you embarrassed? And what's so, art after all.
But for some reason, a sense of anxiety does not leave us for Russian diplomacy. It’s clear where such art can lead. But according to the Foreign Ministry prima, they also judge the theater, i.e. about the whole country. Moreover, international politics is not only and not so much a dance floor. This is an arena for competitions, where sophisticated spectators sit in the stalls. And here one ballet artistry is not enough. You must be able to sting an opponent without weaving extra lace. Otherwise, you yourself can get confused in this network. What’s called dancing.
Is this what is happening with our diplomats today? The failures of Russian diplomacy follow one after another. Want some examples? You are welcome.
Collection of dips
What Ukraine alone is worth. The second most important ally suddenly turned into a bad enemy. Is it really overnight? Is the process of the Western decomposition of Ukraine going secretly and we have not seen it? No, he walked openly, and for a very long time. Right under the nose of our diplomatic mission. And they, i.e. diplomats what? They are smooth bribes.
The following very eloquent example: the Baltic question. Specifically - the issue of violation of human rights in the Baltic states and rabid Russophobia. When our Baltic compatriots, who didn’t find themselves abroad in 1991, began to humiliate and persecute them there in full. They even declared them “non-citizens”, i.e. people of the second grade.
So what did our Russian Foreign Ministry do in three decades? But who needs it on Smolenskaya Square! This is bad luck, now mess with her. This is not a global issue like relations with America.
What could be done? Anything - with this Baltic, which depends entirely on domestic transit. In addition, why did our diplomats not offer social privileges to the Baltic “non-citizens”, such as, for example, permanent visa-free entry to Russia? And for all the other "citizens" of the Baltic States, it was possible to introduce a mandatory procedure for entry here: passing the test in the Russian language. At the level of a confident user and with reading poetry. So that in Russia they too are understood correctly. And do not say that this is stupid, because nobody goes to Russia from there. They go, and a lot, although they do not advertise themselves here.
It was not possible, but necessary to provide material and legal support to the Russian population in the Baltic states and the former republics. To uphold in the international courts his legal right to communicate with Russia. But this is in theory. But in practice, almost nothing has been done by our Foreign Ministry.
Opportunism
Because the style of our diplomacy is expressed in one word - opportunism. To someone else’s way of thinking and tastes. Moreover, opportunism is so ingrained under the skin that our diplomats make no exceptions. They are ready to conduct a constructive dialogue with everyone from a second-person perspective. With great and even small players in the international arena. And this behavior of officials is voluntarily or involuntarily copied by delegates of a lower rank.
Deputies, affectionate cultural figures, prize winners, sports officials, formal-informal representatives, etc. sometimes behave similarly. Unfortunately, they have someone to take an example from.
Alas, slurredness and spinelessness not only entered the style of a la russia diplomacy. This is a feature of state representatives of our public who travel around the world at public expense. For some reason, they consider it their duty to certainly make excuses for Russia for any reason and without. Even when there is absolutely no reason for this. Often they say and show what others want to see and hear from them. Meet the long-known audience expectations.
It's time to stop breaking comedy. Especially if the actors in the Gestapo are no better. After all, nothing too alien to them, too. They are very partial to art, if asked with passion about it. But we persistently make heroes of them when we are accountable to them for something.
Tank instead of art
So, art is widely popular with us, in high esteem. True, the Americans, for example, have other methods and inclinations. Their arrogance is an invariable attribute of foreign policy. Everywhere they go forward like on tank, even if they didn’t have time to mount a horse in time. With their deliberate impudence, they train the rest in politics. They teach that in boots they will throw their feet on the table. But they throw these legs not just like that, but with an eye. Then to remove them for a good reward. Sometimes you don’t even have to throw your legs, but just salute someone with "greetings." And already the customers agree to everything, how can you resist such a charm!
In politics, this is a vivid manifestation of bluffing, which is also akin to art. I wonder what will happen when two artists collide nose to nose? Who will lead someone by the nose, who will win? What do you think, friends?
To be able to wear and change disguises is an obligatory part of the profession of a mummery. But, by the way, not the most important, if there is something else under the mask. In the end, not only the roles are chosen by the artists, but also the actors of the role themselves.
Who to play: lackey or boyar?
Who is better then to play: lackey or boyar? In the question itself you can find the answer. And the love of art has absolutely nothing to do with it. Especially when it comes to international politics. Even in ballet there are choreographers, as well as directors in the theater. And in politics they are even more so.
Where to direct the entire potential of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs if art is done away with? There is one very good idea on this score. As you know, diplomacy costs money, and rather big ones. A very decent amount runs up on some hospitality expenses.
With the expenses, everything is clear, but with the income how? Which ones, you ask? What kind of income can the embassy have? Well, but, for example, collecting old government debts abroad? Not everyone can write off everything, finally. What is not the field of activity for diplomacy as well. We somehow forgot about it, but diplomats do not mind. Something, they say, is why all this.
By the way, why are our embassies so careless in promoting domestic products on the markets? Just don’t say that we have nothing to sell but resources. There is something, only you need to be able to trade, and make efforts to this. As the Chinese embassies do, which are essentially branches of Chinese business abroad. All of China’s foreign policy is primarily an economy, and only then is there a little politics. And our diplomats and consuls do not want to stoop to such market trifles. Not used to combine business with pleasure. Their style of diplomacy is too refined.
In general, our foreign policy, like the foreign ministry, raises more questions than answers. From the side it seems that our diplomacy is boiling in itself, in isolation from national tasks. And the honorable career at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is gradually turning into a sinecure for retired senior pensioners and golden youth from MGIMO. This is just an opinion, but very, very common.
It’s a pity if it also turns out to be true.
No domestic problems of Russia should excuse diplomatic lack of will. Otherwise, diplomacy becomes an empty place, a profession without a clear content and face.
Of course, blindly copying American or Chinese foreign policy is not necessary. They, too, by the way, are not perfect. In addition, it does not help to recreate your own. The main thing is that Russian diplomacy finally becomes pro-Russian, i.e. based on their own, and not on "universal" values. And then she will have a fulcrum.
Friendship of peoples does not exist
One must nevertheless not forget one golden rule: if you do not defend your interests, then involuntarily indulge a stranger. Pour water to a nearby mill. I repeat one more axiom: true friendship of peoples in international practice does not exist. Unions and the world are not eternal and are concluded for much more practical purposes than just unions and the world. In addition, the partnership has the main ones and the followers, and the latter cannot be allowed to sit on the neck of the first. As it happens in our foreign policy.
I would like to wish practicality and common sense to our foreign policy. It is not the facade that needs to be changed, but its content. Then many problems will be solved by protocol, and not by force or military means.
However, in the worst case, the kings have the last argument in stock. We will devote the following article to the army, defense, and military thought. In the meantime, see you later.
Information