Military Review

From the Bosphorus to the Bosphorus: globalization versus globalism

From the Bosphorus to the Bosphorus: globalization versus globalismRussia's security in the near East – West

More recently, globalization and globalism were perceived as synonymous words. Recently, these concepts have increasingly begun to appear as antipodes not only in politics, but also in geostrategy. This clearly manifested itself in the first decade of the 21st century, when Washington declared 11 the “global anti-terrorist war” (GATV) after September 2001 September. The next anniversary of the 911 tragedy coincided with the holding of the 2-September APEC summit in Vladivostok. President Obama explained his noticeable absence at this summit by the presidential race that began in the United States, as well as his participation in mourning events on the eleventh anniversary of “jihad-terrorism against the twin skyscrapers of Manhattan”.

Of course, neither Obama, when he laid wreaths at the site of ruined skyscrapers, nor his main rival in the presidential race from Republicans Romney could then predict that the very holding of these mourning events under hostile Islam slogans with insults from the Prophet Muhammad could cause an explosion of anti-Americanism in the Muslim world. In Benghazi, where the “revolution” began against the Gaddafi regime, the US ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three mission staff were killed during the arson and defeat by the US consulate. On the opening day of the APEC summit in Russia, as well as in America, the Second world war. But the APEC summit held in the Far East had not only jubilee geohistorical, but also new geopolitical changes. For Russia, the Asia-Pacific region, with all its unfinished wars and "deferred" conflicts, has always been and remains as close as the Greater Middle East. The APEC countries, like the BBI, continue to experience the ongoing global financial and economic crisis. Unresolved territorial disputes and conflicts between Russia and Japan over the Kuriles, the PRC and Japan, Korea and the PRC in the East China Sea are still felt as well as the Middle East conflict hub in the Mediterranean and in the region Persian Gulf. He recalls himself not only in Afghanistan and Iraq, but now again in Libya and Syria. There, wars can even more flare up without the intervention of the United States and its NATO allies.


The definition of the “Greater Middle East” has already managed to consolidate in the lexicon of political scientists. Armed conflicts and wars on the BBI with constant regularity alternate there with new crisis shocks.

Analysts, not only in the West, but sometimes in Russia, predict that in conditions of such unresolved crises, conflicts in the Middle East may turn out to be some sort of small parties in comparison with the deferred territorial disputes in the Asia-Pacific region.

The concept of globalization and globalism in the eyes of radical anti-globalists in the West and Islamists in the East is often identified. But recent events on the BBI show that this is not the same thing. Globalization and globalism in the close East-West for Russia appear not so much in the conjugated bundle of the term denoted in Latin, but more often now in their opposition - (in Latin Сontre-versus).

The “global war” declared by Washington of the terror-antiterror could not be limited to the carrying out of two operations “Enduring Freedom” in Afghanistan with “Shock and Awe” in Iraq. After the official announcement of their completion, they continue to be accompanied by protracted “anti-terrorist terror” wars in Palestine – Israel, and now in the neighborhood with them in Syria. The casualties of only US-NATO troops in Afghanistan – Pakistan and Iraq exceeded the number of victims of the 911 disaster. The scale of casualties, especially among civilians in the hot spots of the BBI - Palestine, Israel, Syria, and before that in Yemen and Libya, were already close to the losses in the eight-year war between Iraq and Iran. According to military experts, the war on terrorism cost America 3,3 trillion. of these, more than half of this amount was spent on military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq alone.

Total costs in the world to fight terrorism over the past 11 years, no one has yet calculated. Lifestyles and behavior of people during this time on the entire planet have changed beyond recognition. Everyone has become accustomed to searches and inspections at airports, railway stations, during concerts and even the Olympic Games.

With the advent of the second wave of the Arab "revolutions", the military-political situation on the BBI is likely to worsen even more. Armed clashes and terrorist attacks in both Afghanistan and Iraq continue. New outbreaks of violence in the Gaza Strip and in East Jerusalem threaten to disrupt the Israeli-Palestinian dialogue. The sabotage activity of the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Al-Qaida in southern Arabia and North Africa has noticeably intensified.

The aggravation of the nuclear crisis around Iran continues unabated. All of this turns the BWI region into an expanded arena of the “global war” of antiterror terror. Globalization with globalism is presented here with far more unpleasant surprises than “prizes”, like giving the Nobel Peace Prize four years ago to US President Barack Obama for his good intentions to make “a world without war free of nuclear weapons”. weapons».

The current global economic crisis against the backdrop of unfinished wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the developing nuclear crisis around Iran could be a catalyst for the collapse of the remaining single bloc, NATO. Probably, only time will tell whether the multipolar world order on a global scale will replace the strategy of American-NATO globalism.

It is noteworthy that the head of state, who, like Russia, at the junction of Europe and Asia, four years ago described the situation as a “general civilizational” crisis. In his article “The Fifth Way,” he noted that “signs of long-overdue crises — industrial, energy, environmental, food, social, and even military-political” are simultaneously manifesting themselves. This provides a basis for defining the global crisis as system-wide, developing in at least three areas - the global economy, global politics and global security. The global threats posed by this crisis predetermine certain conditions for the development of adequate global responses. At the same time, American globalism is no less an obstacle to the development of the globalization process than international terrorism itself, to which global war has been declared.


The historical paradox of “optimistic tragedy” in the twentieth century was manifested in the fact that the globalization of the Second World War prevented the catastrophic scenario of “alternative history” after the USSR and the USA almost simultaneously were drawn into it. Alternative scenarios of post-war history could also be formed in a completely different way without the “internationalist” solidarity of the Soviet Union, which provided decisive support for anti-colonial and liberation movements and revolutions, such as in China, Vietnam, Cuba, the Arab world and other Afro-Asian countries.

The world community is now struggling to keep up with the modern processes of multi-level globalization and the crises it generates. This applies both to the current landslide of events, as well as to the assessments of the significant anniversaries and historical dates of the recent past. Neither politicians, nor political scientists, nor the world scientific community is far from always keeping up with the events. For example, the authors of the Globalization International Encyclopedic Dictionary (M., 2006), in which more than 650 scientists from 58 countries participated, could not predict the global crisis that was already approaching. Although in the encyclopedia's vocabulary, more than fifty articles were devoted to various global processes of globalization, none of them mentioned the impending global economic, especially system-wide, and general civilizational crisis.

The global crisis has marked the reverse cyclical nature of the old succession of crises and wars. It may be recalled that during World War II, which followed the Great Depression in America, the crisis was drawing Russia and the United States almost simultaneously from the East and the West. The current global crisis has become a continuation of the GATV and not completed wars there.

The end of the Second World War in Washington was, as it were, combined with the Cold War that had already begun then. According to the authors of the Harper Encyclopedia “World History of Wars”, after the use of atomic weapons, the “nuclear era of the two superpowers” ​​began. With the expansion of the “nuclear club” and the accession to its four founders of five more “illegal immigrants” in the Near, Middle and Far East, the “nuclear era” is coming for the entire multipolar globalizing world.

Politics and economics themselves appear in the global crisis as the continuation of several unfinished or interrupted wars in the Middle, Middle and Far East. Russia is again involved in a “global war” this time almost simultaneously from the outside and from the inside.

A year before the global crisis began, President Vladimir Putin met with a group of young writers. In a conversation with them, he so often uttered the word "competition" that one young writer dreamed at night that the "world war of competition" had already begun. The current global crisis has synthesized competitive wars not only in the economy, but also in politics, ideology and the military sphere. Wars, we shall call them, “unknown generation” are already being waged on many fronts with variable “victories-defeats” not only in the alternative history.

It remains only to thank God that in the military sphere they are conducted without the use of nuclear weapons, referred to as "the weapons of the fifth generation." When now disputes arise about the legitimacy of Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea, or the same Iran to have their own nuclear weapons as a guarantor of their security, it’s not only theoretically that the question arises how much everyone willing to join the “nuclear club” has matured to the necessary level of moral responsibility, to use this weapon as a deterrent against suicidal war.


In the face of new challenges and threats, the CSTO and SCO countries have to re-evaluate the current situation in the world and respond accordingly to it. This probably explains the reasons for joining them so far only in the role of “partners” not only in Asian Sri Lanka, but also in the readiness to soon join them also in Belarus. The established “partnership” with the SCO greatly enhances the role of the Union State Belarus – Russia as a link between Central Europe and Central and Northern Eurasia formed after the collapse of the USSR. The new geopolitical structure of Eurasia also includes the Central (South) Caucasus, Central Asia and Kazakhstan. At the same time, Russia's unique position is that it has become the only Eurasian power that has common land borders with countries that are in partnership with it in Europe and Asia.

Together with the countries of the CSTO and the SCO, it is one of the first to make adjustments to its military doctrines, specifying the agreements concluded earlier and agreements on joint defense with other states.

The global system-wide crisis with the GOK has raised, along with all the APEC countries, the organization of the SCO to the level of solving new global problems. The Council of Heads of Government of the SCO countries gathered in Beijing in the year of the celebration of the 60 anniversary of the PRC was particularly significant. His focus was on developing a common strategy for overcoming the global crisis. Perhaps the most important decision taken at that meeting was the creation of the SCO Interbank Association and a single investment fund. President Putin, summing up the results of his official visit to the People's Republic of China, emphasized that cooperation with China within the framework of the SCO is becoming truly strategic. Based on mutual trust, the SCO is becoming a “truly recognized in the world factor of global security and economic interaction” of the countries of Europe and Asia.


The war in the Caucasus that broke out in August 2008 was presented to the West in its long-standing “big game” against Russia as an occasion not only for building up NATO's military presence in Georgia. The prospect of ensuring the periodic appearance of the American fleet on the Black Sea. This would speed up the creation of a ring of US-NATO bases and advanced missile defense positions on opposing courses of “expanding” the BBB and the North Atlantic Alliance without the formal entry of Georgia, Azerbaijan, and, possibly, Moldova and Uzbekistan in the future. The fact that Russia recognizes South Ossetia and Abkhazia leaves open the question of their future status. This should not, however, preclude their possible future accession to the CSTO or SCO.

In the foreground, in the order of priorities of the new National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation, in connection with this, the problems of ensuring interrelated common European and Eurasian security are put. It cannot ignore the upholding of the sovereignty of the new Caucasian states in the event of an encroachment on the part of Georgia with the support or encouragement of its US-NATO globalists.

After accepting obligations under the concluded treaties on friendship and cooperation with the new independent states in the Caucasus, the concept of Russia's military (defense) strategy will remain “triune” - with the inclusion of a national one (with the priority of protecting the rights of every citizen and society as a whole), then there is state integrity, as well as the geopolitical (external and internal) security of the Russian Federation. Such a triad will be able to guarantee the protection of our national interests and those states with which Russia is bound by treaty obligations in the framework of EurAsEC, the CSTO or the future Eurasian Union and the SCO. Their geopolitical security can be more effectively ensured by the updated strategic triad of nuclear missile deterrence of land, sea and aerospace forces. It should include a set of measures currently being developed for the military-technical, organizational reform of the country's armed forces, the re-equipment and improvement of the entire system of training and social security for servicemen.

The use of the peace-building role of Russia not only in Afghanistan and Syria, but also in resolving the Middle East conflict, taking into account the growing role of Iran in the Greater Middle East, becomes important.


The worst scenario for the development of events would be the exacerbation of the military-political situation in the Black Sea-Caspian region or in the Far East, it can equally become dangerous for all parties. Not always everything that is bad for Russia can necessarily become the best for the United States or Japan. The appearance, for example, in the North Caucasus of a certain "Islamist caliphate" could be just as "a gift" for the United States, as it was with the "Afghan Emirate" under the Taliban.

It would be possible to recall one more important circumstance. Russia was somewhat quick to admit its defeat in "strategic counterplay" with the United States in the "expanded" now Greater Middle East. America continues to lose there rather than strengthen its globalist position. Many political scientists, even in the West, come to the conclusion that the United States, no less, and perhaps even more than Russia, lost the Cold War there. In the book of Academician Yevgeny Primakov, “A World Without Russia?”, Concern was expressed about whether pressing the significant “reset” button would give results. Another clarifying question is appropriate and consistently posed: can Russia withstand the difficult test at the same time by globalization through disintegration or regionalization in the conditions of the still unclear prospects of a “reset” in the East and in the same close for Russia.

The global economic crisis overlaps with the ongoing “global war” against international terrorism. Under these conditions, we can expect not only the ideological, but also another division of the world in the traditional East-West confrontation. The US is not going to abandon the ideology of monetary fetishism under the dollar slogan “God is with us”, and Muslim radicals will not dissociate themselves from militant Islamism. The threat of disintegration and division of the world hangs tightly over the planet Earth with the substitution of ideology and morality in the current atmosphere of globalism, which Patriarch Kirill described as "harmful ecology of the spirit." In any case, the course, in order to deideologize foreign and especially defense policy, will probably have to be corrected carefully, weighing and calculating what possible miscalculations can lead to ill-conceived and often risky “partnership” with NATO.

Next to BBK in the North Caucasian republics and in the South Caucasus, the rampant of various types of extremism and terrorism continues to be acutely felt. The unprecedented level of crime, corruption, violence and cronyism is associated not least with the spread of international terrorism here.

It is this interrelation of threats that is now visible on everything. This obviously gave reason to state at the APEC summit in Singapore that the global crisis "demonstrated the total interdependence of all world economies, which no one had expected before." This can be attributed to the mutual vulnerability of national and global security in an increasingly globalizing world. The principle of “internationally legalizing the indivisibility of security in the Euro-Atlantic area and the Asia-Pacific region should obviously become the same imperative for the entire post-Soviet space of Eurasia.

It is now not so much about the return of the lost former role of the Soviet superpower, as about the approval of Russia in the status of a great Eurasian power - such a strong state that can respond to any threats and challenges. Russia has something to protect. It can be not only a link in the new East-West dichotomy, but also a carrier of a world-building mission in a multipolar world.


As Russia used to “grow together with Siberia”, so after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it began to grow with the expanding “Russian world”.

The new Russian world is already something more than a state and a nation. This is what distinguishes it from Pax Americana and from the modern Jewish world. The first one claims to be a certain hegemon of a unipolar world, a conductor, a moderator of globalism. The Jewish world was also assigned the role of the axis in world history as a collector of Jews scattered throughout the world.

Russia, realizing itself anew as part of the Russian world, is capable not only of confronting globalism, but also of carrying out a real peace-building mission throughout the megacontinent of Euro-Afro-Asia. In the vast space of the former Soviet Union there are quite a few foreigners, including Turkic peoples and Jews, who converted to Orthodoxy and also identify themselves with the Russian world.

The Russian core of the Russian world - the largest people in Europe after the collapse of the Soviet Union, not only decreased in number, but also became the largest divided nation in it. In the post-Soviet space, at least 25 million Russians gained the status of people without a homeland. In the Baltic countries, they are called “people without citizenship”, more precisely, people deprived of the right to be called their citizens. This is not only a matter of depopulation, but also in a number of cases in open discrimination against Russians. In other countries, the former republics of the USSR, Russian national minorities have appeared, although, for example, in the Crimea, the Donbas and in some other regions of Ukraine, they continue to constitute the majority of the population who are deprived of the right to use their native Russian language as the second official language. The same fate can be expected of Russians in Tajikistan and, possibly, after this in other countries of Central Asia.

With the increase in brain drain from Russia and the entire post-Soviet space, along with the depopulation, their intellectual impoverishment also occurs. The call for the saving of nations put forward by Alexander Solzhenitsyn in his time now requires additions. Saving our people means not so much quantitative as its qualitative preservation and spiritual and moral enrichment.

In the context of globalization, the Russian world can be composed of people who not only know the Russian language, but are also attached to a multifaceted, multi-ethnic culture where people who profess Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and other traditional religions have lived together for centuries. The Russian world is, however, much different from other traditional diaspora nations - Armenian, Greek, Lebanese, Palestinian, Kurdish and others. It was generated not so much by external enemies, invasions of the conquerors, but rather by internal cataclysms - revolutions, civil wars, mass repressions. To a large extent, the spiritual and moral “devastation in the heads” of our compatriots also played a role here. Most often and most of all people outside their former homeland pushed their own “native country”.

After the collapse of the USSR, compatriots of Russia have the right to consider themselves not only former Soviet citizens of Russian nationality, but also the 25 million Russians mentioned above in the near abroad and more than a million Russians living in Israel today. All of them in different years left the Soviet Union. Of these, as it turns out now, at least 700 thousand can go back to Russia and the CIS countries — a new war will break out at the BBI. This is no longer only in the Knesset of Israel beforehand sound the alarm. The “great exodus” of Israeli émigrés, as the Russian Jews are called there, in the opposite direction, back to the diaspora, can begin any day, as soon as in the region and around Israel they really “smell powder”.

Many emigrants and members of mixed Russian-Arab families who are attached to Russian culture are entitled to refer to the Russian world. In addition to 200, thousands of Arabs who have received higher and specialized education in the USSR and Russia, many members of their families also consider themselves to be “related” with Russia. About 290, thousands of such “Russians” live now in Iran. This is the third generation of Iranians who, for various reasons, emigrated first from Iran to Russia, and then returned to their ancestral homeland. Many of them consider Russian land their homeland and talk to each other in Russian. Thousands of such families are also found in the West, in Europe and America. Such a resurgent new Russian world, although not yet united, can play the role of a reliable support for Russia in its mission to resist aggressive globalism. At the Third World Congress of Russian Compatriots Living Abroad, held in early December 2009, it was noted that their number has already reached about 30 million. They have their communities in more than 80 countries of the world and are part of spiritual space of the Russian world, constitute, in fact, the future reserve of modernization of Russia.

The Russian Mediterra neologism, washed by three oceans by analogy with the Mediterranean, connecting three continents - Europe, Africa and Asia - appeared in the first year after the collapse of the Soviet Union. It was then that revealed the true meaning of this geopolitical metaphor.

The problem of ensuring the national security of Russia was considerably complicated even before Washington declared a “global war” of anti-terror terror. The Russian “Mediterra” has noticeably decreased in its territory, ceasing to be one sixth of the land. Both the total number of its population and the number of Russians themselves within the new borders of the Russian Federation have almost halved. But on the length of its land borders, Russia continues to occupy first place in the world. The length of its sea coasts on the Baltic, Black and Caspian seas has noticeably decreased, as well as the total number of its sea gates.

After a significant reduction in production capacity and GDP, Russia has ceased to be one of the two world superpowers. Such consequences of a geopolitical catastrophe will be felt not only in all three areas of the country's economic, social and political modernization. This may also apply to the achievement of the triad of priority goals of the previously announced “Strategy” of ensuring human security, society and the Russian state itself.

As can be seen from the results of the APEC summit in Vladivostok, Russia along with the development of partnership in the western direction is increasingly expanding cooperation not only with the countries of EurAsEC, CSTO, SCO, but also the Asia-Pacific region and BRICS. All this cannot but introduce its own corrections to the geopolitical coordinates of the triune security of Russia - it remains a link between all the mentioned international structures with which it actively cooperates. However, the difficulties of such a combination are aggravated by the globalist plans of NATO to “seriously and for a long time” fight next to Central Asia in Afghanistan, Pakistan and on the BWI. In such conditions, the issues of modernization of the economy, policies and strategies should proceed from the new priorities of the Triune Security Strategy of Russia. In these conditions, it becomes important to determine the special place and role of Russia with the possible formation of “anti-globalist triangles” in the future, such as RIC - Russia, India, China or BRICS. The role of Moscow in them will be defined as a full member of the CSTO and the SCO without taking into account their possible "reformatting" into a bloc or military-political alliance capable of withstanding the degrading North Atlantic Alliance, in particular, and modern globalism in general.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sasha 19871987
    Sasha 19871987 4 October 2012 09: 22
    an entertaining article, yes, we must be friends with the East, the West, for it strives to use our resources ...
    1. Heinrich ruppert
      Heinrich ruppert 4 October 2012 10: 59
      Quote: sasha 19871987
      need to be friends with the East

      So the east, too, would not mind chopping off the Far East.
  2. alexng
    alexng 4 October 2012 09: 49
    Russia, India and China would quickly unite against Western globalization, and then it would be generally nonsense ... for all the attacks of the West. Although even now the West is yapping like a pug from around the corner, for any reason and for no reason.
    1. Kaa
      Kaa 4 October 2012 17: 37
      Quote: alexneg
      Russia, India and China would quickly unite against Western globalization,

      And you are firmly convinced that China and India, which have become the "manufactories of the world", are not participants in Western globalization. And it seems to me that the situation is somewhat more complicated. In a nutshell, a confrontation has emerged along the UWB axis - China. No one has a decisive advantage when military, industrial and demographic factors are taken into account together, rather than individually, as is often the case. Russia's economic resources and nuclear weapons is a very significant factor. For this reason, the UWB wants to "be friends with Russia against China", China wants to "be friends with Russia against the UWB", which the Russian government wants, no one clearly explains, who knows, please enlighten ... feel
  3. AK-74-1
    AK-74-1 4 October 2012 10: 58
    Interesting article.
  4. valokordin
    valokordin 4 October 2012 11: 25
    The article is substantial and voluminous, the situation once again confirms the need for a solid foreign and domestic policy. But this does not work for two reasons. Power and business are inseparable from each other, the stigma in the gun and the enemies of Russia have convenient long strings to pull them from time to time. It is urgently necessary to separate power from business, but this is hardly possible by law, since the deputies-businessmen will not agree to this, although there are timid attempts, but this, I think, is for domestic consumption. Now the aggression against Syria is in full swing and this is, first of all, the quintessence of Turkey's policy. She is not independent and fulfills someone else's will. We need to defend Syria, not take a "so-called balanced position." DO NOT pay attention to the barking of Western and Alqaid society
  5. i-gor63
    i-gor63 4 October 2012 12: 58
    Demagogy! Hundreds of Russians from the near abroad cannot find a job in their historical homeland because of bureaucratic arbitrariness. People despair, remain on the street - here's the "Russian world". This is how we gather, protect and attract our fellow countrymen. Our rulers would take an example from Israel, how they arrange their compatriots there.
  6. bask
    bask 4 October 2012 13: 11
    Foreign policy should be supported by an effective economy, social policy and good defense. The more Russia has “nuclear” missiles, it is desirable of all kinds. The more they have authority in the world.!
  7. Megatron
    Megatron 5 October 2012 01: 07
    Russia, India and China

    India and China are rivals, Russia and China are rivals.

    I would put it this way: friends - the Russian Federation, India, Vietnam. Partners - Iraq, Syria, Iran.

    China itself and for itself, it has no allies, only temporary benefits.