Vladimir Putin speaks, Part Two
Vladimir Putin speaks, Part Two
The building of a new and more just world order of diverse civilizations
My commentary of September 30, 2022, reviewed Vladimir Putin’s address to the Russian people on September 21, in which he explained the reasons for the military operation in Ukraine and reported on its progress. “Vladimir Putin speaks: The ongoing decline of Western hegemony is irreversible,” September 30, 2022.
In today’s commentary, I discuss Putin’s address at the 20th anniversary meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club on October 5, 2023. The Valdai Discussion Club is a Moscow-based discussion forum established in 2004. It is named after Lake Valdai, where the Club’s first meeting took place. The Club is highly regarded both in Russia and abroad. Scholars from eighty-five countries have participated in its activities, including professors from major world universities and think tanks, as have politicians and public and cultural figures.
Putin began his address with the observation that the dramatic changes in the world during the last twenty years have been greater than changes that took place over decades in previous historical periods, and they have shaped a fundamental transformation in international relations. Twenty years ago, there was widespread hope that states and peoples had learned the lessons from the destructive military and ideological confrontations of the twentieth century, and there was widespread awareness that the serious challenges confronting humanity called for joint action and collective solutions. This should have been obvious to everyone, but it was not understood by the power elites of a few Western countries.
At the same time, Putin observed, Russia twenty years ago was beginning to recover from the extremely difficult period following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and the Russian government launched a process that its leaders saw as an important contribution to the building of a new and more just world order. Unfortunately, Russia’s constructive engagement with the world was misunderstood by those who had declared themselves the winners of the Cold War. They saw it as obedience to others and compliance with the interests of others, and as a willingness to set aside Russian national interests.
During the period, Putin noted, the United States and its satellites took a steady course toward hegemony in military, political, economic, cultural, and moral affairs. Russia believed that such attempts to establish a worldwide monopoly were doomed to failure, because the world had become too complicated and diverse to be subjected to one system, even when that system was backed by the enormous power that the West had accumulated. Russia, therefore, warned that this approach would lead to a dead-end and would increase the threat of a military conflict. But no one listened or wanted to listen to Russia. The so-called partners of Russia in the West were full of arrogance.
Putin stressed that the accumulation of power by the West was based in centuries of colonialism. The history of the West is a story of endless territorial expansion, which has created a military and financial hierarchy that constantly needs more natural, human, and technological resources to feed its continued expansion. Driven by the need for more resources, the West cannot change its direction.
Putin at one time thought that Russia could be a part of this Western centered world-economy. It had allies and partners, and Putin thought that Russia had gotten its foot in the door and had become part of the club. The Cold War was over and there were no longer ideological confrontations. But Russia wanted to be included in the club on the basis of its policy of constructive engagement seeking a more just world, and this approach was not consistent with the geopolitical interests of NATO and the West. They do not need or want a country like Russia, Putin declared. Their arrogance toward others and their self-aggrandizement was and is the problem.
As a result, Russia, Putin declared, has been compelled to take military action, in response to the orchestrated coup in Kiev in 2014; to the efforts to overthrow the government and intimidate the people in Crimea and Sevastopol; to the bombing of Donbass for nine years; and to death threats against persons speaking their native language. The so-called “war in Ukraine” was started by the regime in Kiev with the direct support from the West, Putin observed. Russia’s special military operation is aimed at stopping this war.
Putin maintained that the Russian military response should have been anticipated by the West. “Unilateral steps, no matter who takes them, will inevitably prompt retaliation.” Every sovereign, independent, and self-respecting country retaliates in response to expansionism into its area.
Everyone understands that in the international system today, Putin observed, arbitrariness reigns, and “all decision-making is up to those who think they are exceptional, sinless, and right.” In the international system today, “any country can be attacked simply because it is disliked by a hegemon, who has lost any sense of proportion and any sense of reality.”
In the special military operation in Ukraine, Russia is defending the principles that underly the new post-colonial international order. Russia does not seek territory, Putin maintains. It has no interest in conquering additional territory. It has territory where it has much work to do in developing, in Siberia, in Eastern Siberia, and in the Russian Far East.
The new international order promoted by Russia, Putin maintained, seeks permanent peace on the basis of the security of all, the equilibrium of power, and mutual respect for the sovereignty and cultures of all. “Lasting peace will only be possible when everyone feels safe and secure [and] understands that their opinions are respected.” In the new order, “there is a balance in the world where no one can unilaterally force or compel others to live or behave as a hegemon pleases even when it contradicts the sovereignty, genuine interests, traditions, or customs of peoples and countries. In such an arrangement, the very concept of sovereignty is simply denied.”
The new international order rejects the formation of interest-based blocs and “us versus them” confrontation, which is a legacy of twentieth century Western political culture, shaped not only by its needs for military action and expansion but also by its requirements with respect to internal social control.
“Commitment to bloc-based approaches and the push to drive the world into a situation of ongoing ‘us versus them’ confrontation is a bad legacy of the 20th century. It is a product of Western political culture, at least of its most aggressive manifestations. To reiterate, the West – at least a certain part of the West, the elite – always needs an enemy. They need an enemy to justify the need for military action and expansion. But they also need an enemy to maintain internal control within a certain system of this very hegemon and within blocs like NATO or other military-political blocs. There must be an enemy so everyone can rally around the ‘leader.’”
The bloc-based approach seeks to destroy the architecture of open and inclusive cooperation. It limits the rights of states, and “restricts their freedom to develop along their own path, attempting to drive them into a ‘cage’ of obligation.” This takes away part of their sovereignty, by imposing solutions in the economy and with respect to security. This is another manifestation of the colonial mentality. Putin declared that they should get rid of their arrogance and drop their colonial-era thinking.
Putin notes that the ruling elites in many countries are forcing the people to accept policies that a significant number of people, a majority in some countries, are not willing to embrace. “The authorities continually invent justifications for their actions, blaming growing internal problems to external causes, and fabricating or exaggerating non-existent threats.” Russia is a favorite target of these manipulations, as is the People’s Republic of China, India, the Arab world, and Muslims. “Anyone who acts independently and in its own interests” is targeted.
Putin emphasized that Russia’s Foreign Policy Concept is based on the civilization-state. This concept holds that there are many civilizations in the world, and none is superior to another. All are equal civilizations, each with its own culture, traditions, and aspiration. In the new and more just world order, there is diversity, as “each state and society strives to develop its own path of development which is rooted in culture and traditions, and is steeped in geography and historical experiences, both ancient and modern, as well as the values held by its people.”
There also is diversity, Putin notes, within each of the world’s civilizations. Russia, for example, has learned its lessons, and it is able to construct national unity and state integrity on the basis of diversity.
The world is becoming increasingly diverse, Putin observed, such that it cannot be governed with the same methods, which certain states are still trying to impose.
“A truly effective and strong state system cannot be imposed from the outside. It grows naturally from the civilizational roots of countries and peoples. . . . Relying on your civilization is a necessary condition for success in the modern world. . . More and more states are coming to this conclusion, becoming aware of their own interests and needs, opportunities and limitations, their own identity and degree of interconnectedness with the world around them.”
Putin expressed optimism that the world of the future will be guided by the civilizational approach. “I am confident that humanity is not moving towards fragmentation into rivaling segments, a new confrontation of blocs, whatever their motives, or a soulless universalism of a new globalization. On the contrary, the world is on its way to a synergy of civilization-states, large spaces, communities identifying as such.” Where all civilizations are different, and each civilization is “culturally self-sufficient, drawing upon its own history and traditions for ideological principles and values.”
The West, Putin noted, has forgotten the notion of reasonable self-restraint. The elites of the West are fixated on their one goal, which is to promote their particular interests at any cost. In this situation, Russia has the duty to protect its own civilization. This is a duty that all civilizations have.
The civilizational approach “is based on the fundamental, long-term interests of states and peoples, interests that are dictated not by the current ideological situation, but by the entire historical experience and legacy of the past, on which the idea of a harmonious future rests. If everyone were guided by this, there would be far fewer conflicts in the world.”
Putin concluded by declaring that “Russia was, is and will be one of the foundations of this new world system, ready for constructive interaction with everyone who strives for peace and prosperity, but ready for tough opposition against those who profess the principles of dictatorship and violence. We believe that pragmatism and common sense will prevail, and a multipolar world will be established.”
Russia, China, and the Third World
The Russian Foreign Policy Concept as formulated by Putin is based in Russian history and collective struggle. The history of Russia is fundamentally different from that of China and the Third World, in that Russia was one of the competing world imperialisms of the nineteenth century, ultimately losing out to English, French, and American imperialisms. During the twentieth century, as the Soviet Union, it opted for a militarist defense of its Western frontier against Western imperialist threats, combined with inconsistent and selective cooperation with anti-imperialist states in China and the Third World, including a significant relation with revolutionary Cuba. Today, having recovered from the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia seeks a constructive engagement with the world, bringing it to a foreign policy formulation that is in full harmony with the concepts of a New International Economic Order and a multipolar world-system as expressed by Chinese President Xi Jinping (see “China proposes Global Civilization Initiative,” March 21, 2023); and with the formulations during the last twenty years of a revitalized Non-Aligned Movement, the Group of 77 plus China, BRICS Plus, and regional integration projects in Latin America and the Caribbean, East Asia, the Arab world, and Africa. (See “A more just world under construction: Circumventing imperialism in decadence,” April 28, 2023).
The costs and economic consequences of the war in Ukraine
In response to a question, Putin declared that Russia is managing the costs and the economic consequences of the war in Ukraine better than are the USA and Europe. Europe is experiencing stagnation, especially in its manufacturing sector, as a consequence of the restrictions on the importation of Russian oil and gas, which in conjunction with U.S. economic and financial policies, is giving rise to relatively cheap energy prices in the USA. Indeed, many European production facilities are relocating to the USA. For its part, the USA is paying for the war by increasing its overextended state budget deficit and printing money, measures that are giving rise to the inflation of food prices worldwide.
In contrast, the Russian state deficit is projected to increase only by 1% over the next few years. Russia has adjusted to the sanctions by investing in the development of agricultural production and in industrial production, particularly in steel, optics, and electronics. “We have overcome all the problems that arose after the sanctions were imposed on us and we began the next stage of development on a new foundation.” The real disposable income of the people is growing, Putin noted. Russia is fulfilling its strategic development initiatives and social responsibilities formulated prior to the military operation in Ukraine.
Putin later added in response to another question that Russia also has adjusted to the sanctions by expanding trade with Asia and other areas of the world. I would add that Russia’s increasing trade with China, Latin America, and Africa, provoked as an adjustment to the imposition of sanctions, is strengthening the tendency toward a multipolar world order.
Reform of the United Nations
In response to a question, Putin affirmed that there is a contradiction between the emerging international order and the institutions of the United Nations system, which were established in 1945 at the height of U.S. hegemony. So, international laws and norms must be changed. However, the current system of international laws ought not be destroyed, Putin maintained, without replacing them with something new, because destruction of the current norms would create chaos, in a certain sense like we have now with certain countries ignoring the rules with impunity. If the system were to be completely swept away, there would not even be reference points. There needs to be a reform of the system, step-by-step, but with urgency. For example, the UN Security Council should be expanded to include countries that have much greater importance in the world-system than they had in 1945, such as India and Brazil. Consensus should be attained for all changes, so that the system of international law would have legitimacy and would be enforceable.
I would add that Putin’s position of constructively working within the UN system, but seeking to reform its undemocratic structures, is fully consistent with the positions taken by China and the governments of the Third World.
Russia’s relations with the West
Russia’s civilizational code is based in Christianity, Putin declared, in response to a question on Peter the Great’s project of greater contact with the West. Putin’s intention was to affirm that Russian civilization has much in common with Western civilization, and therefore, Russia would not want to shut the door on relations with the West, even while it is expanding relations with other civilizations. However, he noted, Russia is not happy with current cultural tendencies in the West, in which the West is destroying its roots in Christian culture.
On the issue of relations with the West, Putin noted in response to another question that despite the destruction of one line of Nord Stream, a second line of Nord Stream 2 is not damaged, and it could be used to supply 27.5 billion cubic meters of gas to Europe. All that is needed is authorization by the government of the Federal Republic of Germany. “They make a decision today – tomorrow we open the valve, and that’s that; the gas is on its way. But they will not do this, to the detriment of their own interests, because, as we say, ‘their bosses in Washington’ will not allow them to.” At the same time, Russia continues to supply gas to Europe through the TurkStream pipelines and through the territory of Ukraine, for which Russia pays the government of Ukraine a transit fee. These pipelines are constantly being attacked by unmanned vehicles with English-speaking specialists and advisors involved, Putin noted. But Russia is ready to cooperate in sending gas to new markets that want the product, and Russia is ready to build new pipeline systems.
The take of the Western media
CNN reported that Vladimir Putin at the Valdai Forum in Sochi “announced that Russia has successfully carried out a test of a new generation of nuclear-powered cruise missile.” The comment by Putin was made as part of a thorough answer to a question by Sergei Karaganov, asking if the Russian doctrine on the use of nuclear weapons had become obsolete. The question was suggesting that the doctrine was tying Russia’s hands, in that it was preventing Russia from using nuclear weapons in response to non-nuclear but monstrous aggression by the West.
Putin responded that he had previously read some articles and documents prepared by Karaganov, and that he understood and appreciated his position and that of other experts with a patriotic attitude. Putin maintained, however, that the Russian Military Doctrine on the possible use of nuclear weapons is not obsolete. He reminded the audience of the two conditions in which said doctrine permits the use of nuclear weapons. The first is that they can be used in a so-called retaliatory strike, in which a nuclear attack against Russia is launched, and within seconds, it is detected by Russia’s early warning system, enabling response against the aggression. This condition of mutually assured destruction continues to function today as a deterrent, as an absolute guarantee of preventing a potential aggressor from launching a nuclear attack, Putin maintained.
The second condition in which nuclear weapons are permitted is that of an existential threat to the Russian state. Putin considers this condition to be a remote possibility at present. He is not able to imagine any situation, including an armed attack, in which the existence of the Russian state would be under threat. Putin’s response implies that he is not disposed to seek legislative authorization for a nuclear attack in response to the threat established by NATO expansionism and the unconventional war against Russia, which began in 2014. He is satisfied with the effectiveness of the strategy of combining diplomacy with the special military operation in Ukraine.
Although there is no reason to change the doctrine, Putin noted, the question of the resumption of nuclear tests is an entirely different matter. He is receiving some calls to do so. He reminded the audience that the United States and Russia have signed a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Russia has signed and ratified the Treaty, whereas the United States has signed but has not ratified it. Putin reported that Russia has been developing new strategic nuclear weapons, and specialists agree that in order to ensure that they are fail-free, they should be tested. In my interpretation of Putin’s words as translated in the English-language Website of the President of Russia, Putin stated that new strategic nuclear-powered cruise missiles have been developed and test-launched with success, but the nuclear warheads have not been tested. And he declared that “I am not ready to tell you right now whether we need or do not need to carry out these tests.”.
But Russia could carry out the tests, Putin observed, noting that Russia acts in this field in correspondence with actions taken by the United States. Russia could in principle withdraw the ratification, if the Russian Duma MPs were so inclined, so that neither Russia nor the USA is ratifying the treaty, and thus neither side is bound by it.
Apparently, CNN made the objective editorial judgment that Putin’s proposal for a more just world based in mutual respect among diverse civilizations is of no interest or concern to the people of the United States. And that his comments on Russian nuclear preparedness, isolated from their context, is all that the people of the United States need to know.
The Guardian did better than CNN in its October 5 article, “Vladimir Putin escalates nuclear rhetoric with threat to resume testing.” Although it did not place Putin’s comments in the context of a question concerning a possible revision of the Russian doctrine on the use of nuclear weapons, it did report that Putin’s comments “came after hardline political scientists and commentators in Russia said a return to nuclear testing could send a powerful message to Moscow’s enemies in the West.” And it reasonably observed that “a resumption in nuclear tests by Russia, the US or both would be profoundly destabilizing at a time when tensions between the two countries are greater than at any time since the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.” However, like CNN, the Guardian made no mention of Putin’s description of Russian foreign policy as seeking a more just world through mutual respect among civilizations.
The Washington Post actually reported on the central theme of Putin’s address, namely, his vision of mutual respect among civilizations. This reflects what appears to be a commitment by the Washington Post for more thorough reporting on Russia, but from a decidedly Western point of view. The famous Washington-based daily declared that “Putin portrayed Russia as a champion of rising nations in a new multipolar world, which he demanded that the United States and other Western powers begin to respect as equals.” The author of the article, Mary Ilyushina, further noted that Putin declared, “I am convinced that sooner or later both the new centers of a multipolar world order and the West will have to start an equal conversation about a common future for us.” However, she proceeded to dismiss Putin’s declarations as inconsistent with reality. She maintains that Russia is “deeply isolated,” citing the UN General Assembly vote against Russia earlier this month and ignoring the expanding economic relations that Russia has been developing with China, Russia, Latin America, and Africa since the imposition of sanctions against Russia by the West.
Conclusion
Putin’s vision of an alternative multicivilizational world gives emphasis to the right of nations to sovereignty, in opposition to a world-system that is shaped by the imperialist interests of a few powers in controlling the natural resources, labor, markets, and technologies of the world. It is a vision that is rooted in interpretations of Russian history that are central to a national project of recovery from the national dishonor of the disintegration of the Soviet Union. And it is a vision that is in harmony with an emerging multipolar world, in which China and the nations of the Global South have a proportionate role, and in which each nation exercises it sovereign right to formulate its own development plans. Vladimir Putin’s speech at the Valdai Discussion Club is yet one more sign that the world is in transition to a post-imperialist, pluripolar, and multicivilizational world. Meanwhile, the major media in the West continue to miseducate the people.
A free subscription option is available, with capacity to read, send, and share all posts. A paid subscription ($5 per month or $40 per year) enables you to make comments and to support the costs of the column; paid subscribers also receive a free PDF copy of my book on Cuba and the world-system. Ten percent of income generated through subscriptions to the column is donated to the Cuban Society for Philosophical Investigation.
Follow me on Twitter: Charles McKelvey@CharlesMcKelv14