Zbigniew Brzezinski as a mirror of American devolution

Thirty years of the path traversed in fifteen years

The outgoing year 2012 was marked than the rest, the publication of a fundamentally based on the fundamental beliefs of understanding the processes taking place in the world and the United States, Zbigniew Brzezinski's book "Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power» (Strategic vision: America and the crisis of global power) . (1) The creator is known for, speak out so its a very indifferent attitude towards Russia. The extent of its influence on U.S. policy is much discussion — evaluation right back. But there are unmistakable aspects. Pretty to look at the arguments often published them, and then compare them with those or other actions of the U.S. administration, especially coming out some time later doctrinal documents of the "Strategy for U.S. national security," and you can just see the numerous direct effects. Sometimes the only difference in the style and the fact that it is not bound by official posts Brzezinski defines many of his thoughts even more straight and even cynical.

Either way, the last book Brzezinski can safely be called the vestibule, as it echoes the thoughts soon followed it prognostic National Intelligence Council report, the U.S. "Global Trends 2030" (about which we will go in the upcoming separate conversation.) Some even liken this book famous Churchill's Fulton speech. I must say that with a "strategic vision" Brzezinski closely acquainted extended to the new U.S. secretary of state, John Kerry, who wrote in his review of this work, that "it should read anyone who is interested in foreign policy."

The book "Strategic Vision" came exactly 15 years after another landmark book Brzezinski "The Grand Chessboard» (The Grand Chessboard. American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives). Between these two dates is the period in U.S. history, which can be estimated as devolution of the global omnipotence to its rapid loss on many characteristics that make up the sovereign power. Recall that devolution (coagulation, regression) — a trend reverse evolution (deployment progress) — in the British language means also the transfer of power or capabilities. In this sense, the term is perfectly suited to what Brzezinski outlines. The main thing in his latest book — not a statement of system errors, which led to an increasing weakening of the U.S. position in the world, and it is clear that many people without Brzezinski, recipes and the transfer of power "someone" or "something" that is going to replace the South American leadership. To paraphrase VI Lenin, who believed, as you know, Leo Tolstoy's "mirror of the Russian revolution," Zbigniew Brzezinski should be called the "mirror of the American devolution." So now, if you look at Brzezinski's argument under this point of view, it will be possible to find a fundamentally gap between Brzezinski, a 15-year-old and Brzezinski today, and there can not be. His idea of delegating leadership to someone in most cases turn out the rationale for conservation identified opportunities for America, only without the loud words and a different sauce.

When the "strategic vision" has just appeared, many people, including those in Russia, hurried to declare this work a complete break with the past Brzezinski's opinion, expressed in the "Grand Chessboard", and he himself — almost transformed from "Saul" in " Paul. " Brzezinski Tipo now speaks for multilateralism and the United States for refusing the role of "God's chosen hegemony in world politics", so that America does not repeat the fate of the Soviet Union. Brzezinski, he says, no longer considers Russia a "black hole", and advocated for its inclusion in the West. But a careful analysis of the 2-books indicate their organic relationship and continuity with all the terminology mimicry. Then, and now to America Brzezinski — "Colossus of the world", and upcoming multipolarity — a dispassionate reality that he can not ignore and which calls to adapt. With all of this is to note that the prerequisites of "American devolution", according to Brzezinski, priemuschestvenno, personal — incorrect solutions American administrations. And on September 11 with the following neobmyslennoy and projection of U.S. power bill, first in Iraq and Afghanistan, it appears almost the main precondition for the weakening of U.S. hegemony. It turns out that the terrorist attack on the twin towers — the most efficient power operation in world history. Believing in the exclusive assignment of America, Brzezinski still can not really accept the prophetic statement of another well-known researcher Paul Kennedy, made by him in 1987 in a serious study of "The Rise and Fall of majestic powers." (2) P. Kennedy impressively substantiated then stated that because of their category of "imperial overheating" no government could not, and never will be able to stay long hegemony on the world stage. Even then, he estimates, the United States, along with the Soviet Union entered the phase of "imperial overheating", and their decline is inevitable, regardless of the will of those or other politicians.

15 years ago Brzezinski categorically stated that "in the next few decades can be created really functioning system of global cooperation, built with the geopolitical reality that equally take on the role of international" regent ", able to carry the burden of responsibility for the stability and peace in the world. Geostrategic success achieved in the present case properly legitimize America's role as the first, only and last truly global superpower. " (3) At the same time America's global primacy is particularly affected because, as a long-term and well will continue her an advantage on the Eurasian continent. (4)

Meanwhile, Brzezinski, and then realized that the front of America as the leading nation in the world is open only a narrow historic opportunity for a "constructive use" of his status as a world power. This period, as he admitted, may be relatively short-lived. Democracy has never been reached global advantages. The pursuit of power and in particular the economic costs and human sacrifice, which often asks for the implementation of global power are usually incompatible with democratic societies. Democratic type of device prevents imperial mobilization. He believed that "a comprehensive and coordinated geo-strategy towards Eurasia should be based on the effective recognition of the impact of America's borders and the inevitable narrowing over time, the scope of this influence." In the end, world politics is sure to become characteristic of all the least concentration of power in the hands of the 1st country. As can be seen, "the United States is not only the first and the only superpower in a truly global scale, but most of all, and the last."

And yet, so do not miss out on designated historic opportunity, Brzezinski called for the active intervention of America in world affairs "paying special attention to strengthening the international geopolitical stability, which is able to restore the West's historic sense of optimism." Because now moaning about the "erroneous interventions", he would have to lay much of the responsibility on himself and his calls because all these acts were carried out under the pretext of specifically "to ensure stability."

The general sense of his arguments already at that time was limited to the fact that the United States should reach the status of the "indispensable power" (of which, namely, the public said past president Bill Clinton), without whose leadership world would be doomed to chaos. W
ith all this Brzezinski referred to the works of more of the 1st ruler doom of the American elite Samuel Huntington, who wrote: "In a world where there is no rule of the United States, there will be more violence and mess and less democracy and economic growth than a world where the United States continues to exert more influence on global issues than any other country. Consistent international primacy of the United States is the most important to the welfare and safety of the Yankees and for the future of freedom, democracy, open economies, and international order in the land. " (5)

With respect to the RF Brzezinski "chessboard" words are not found just unflattering and derogatory, calling it a "dark hole" in the heart of Eurasia and suggesting that for herself it would be better to split up, at least, in three parts. In general, the U.S. long-term task, which he formulated, it is not excluded Russia from the map, and sought "to prevent the revival of the Eurasian empire again, which is able to prevent the implementation of the U.S. geo-strategic goal of creating a larger Euro-Atlantic system with which to further our homeland would be hard and firmly connected. " (6)

With all of this to the dismay of Russian fans of Atlanticism Brzezinski expressed rigid belief that at least some rapprochement with Russia on the issue of NATO expansion "should not lead to the actual conversion of in the decision-making member of the alliance, that fact would have diminished the special nature of NATO's Euro-Atlantic, while same time reduced to the status of second-class re-admitted to the Union State. " This, in his opinion, would open up the possibility for Russia to resume its test "not only recover lost influence in Central Europe, and to use its presence in NATO in order to play at the US-European differences to weaken America's role in Europe."

Overall, despite all the obstacles marked them to save for U.S. world hegemony in the "chessboard" Brzezinski averted this time when hardly anyone will negotiate America's status as the first nation in the world, more than 30 years, as "neither one nation-state may not be able to catch up with the U.S. in the 4 major qualities of force (military, economic, technical and cultural), which in totality and determine the decisive political influence on a global scale. "

(1) In general, published in the successful Russian translation of the title of the book is not translated well: Zbigniew Brzezinski. "Strategic glance: America and the Global Crisis." M. Astrel, 2012.
(2) Kennedy Paul, The rise and fall of the great powers, Vintage Books, NY, 1987.
(3) Zbigniew Brzezinski. Majestic chess board. MA, International Affairs, 1998, p.112.
(4) Ibid, p.18.
(5) Samuel P. Hantington. Who International Primacy Matters / / International Security. — Spring 1993. — P. 83.
(6) Zbigniew Brzezinski. Majestic chess board. MA, International Affairs, 1998, p.48.

MS Glory Gorbachev is contagious?

Halfway through the allotted in the landmark book by Zbigniew Brzezinski's "The Grand Chessboard" thirty-term preservation of unchallenged U.S. hegemony in the world — exactly 15 years, and now in the recent book "Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power," he states accelerate the process of devolution of American power. Brzezinski admits that "exuberant optimism" about the omnipotence of the United States did not last long. Consumer culture and the deregulation of the economy led to the bursting bubbles of the stock market and large-scale financial crisis. Ruinous for the country were Bush's war, even earlier — Balkan adventure Clinton and the destruction of American foreign policy in general. "Between the Russian Union at sunset of his days and the beginning of the XXI century America is really an alarming resemblance", — says Brzezinski … (1) The balance of global power has shifted inexorably from the West to the East. The growth of oscillation about the viability of the South American system is very shaken the faith in a "prosperous heritage of the West." If the "American system in the eyes of the public will lose its relevance, it can completely transcend their successes of the Chinese."

And later in the book throughout Brzezinski, noting the restriction limits the impact of the United States on many of the characteristics of the sovereign power, seeks to show how badly the public land will be without their beneficial effects. A possible threat arising out of the dispersal of forces he calls "the potential instability of the global hierarchy." Proceeding from this, whole A period of international life he characterizes as a "post-American mess."

In particular, it rests on the coming "Asian rivalry", in what will be a troublemaker, first, China. Brzezinski, in announcing the Asian country competitors, reminiscent in some kind of respect to the European colonial era, The Atlantic country, and then the continental competition for geopolitical advantages, scares the fact that a similar competition "in the end resulted in two bloody world wars." (2)

Brzezinski warns that although the West as such still alive, "his global dominance is in the past." To survive, the West must realize that his "place and role in the global context" will depend on the strength of the South-American system and the American actions abroad. Its decline is a danger throughout the West as a whole. Brzezinski quite vehemently condemned the European Union for the fact that he does not understand it and does not help the United States maintain its leadership. Very self-centered European Union, in his view, behaves "as if his primary political task — to become the world's most well equipped home for the elderly." (3)

As for Brzezinski's readiness to "turn Russia into an extended West", it must be said that an equal partner with interests in Russia, he does not see. Our homeland he quickly acts the role of a geographical place, which is applicable to master, but in which even to the Russian followers of such a "rapprochement" place in the sun may not be there. Brzezinski openly dreaming of a time when "the weakening Russian presence in the Far East will receive an influx of new economic and demographic forces from the West." Vladivostok "could become a European city, while remaining part of Russia all this." (4) With respect to Russian Arctic and opening there abilities Brzezinski argues in Chapter noticeable with the title "alienated the public domain", expressing concern that the "capture" of Russia's own bit of wealth in the region could "provoke a severe imbalance in the geopolitical landscape" in its favor.

In this sense, except for a more accurate choice of words, the current position in relation to Brzezinski's Russia is not a lot different from his own position, formulated 15 years ago in a "chessboard". Our homeland is almost everywhere he speaks as a non-entity, and the object to which you want to do something — "attach", "draw", "master". He condemned the "Russian elite" for refusing to move closer to NATO, but even in spite of all this logic as before, warns of the Russian Federation from full membership in the bloc, as "any move in this direction will contribute to a more conventional Russian task weaken NATO." (5)

In general irrational desire to stab Russia pobolnee Brzezinski sometimes leads to a completely paradoxical, apparently below the bar itself thinker statements. It is, namely, wrote about the historical powerlessness of, which stemmed Tipo victory in the main because of the mistakes of others, in this sample. "Do not attacking Napoleon in Russia in 1812
, is unlikely to be Russian troops entered Paris in 1815." (6) The question is, why they went there in general?

Sometimes cynicism Brzezinski's all the same "off scale." It is, for example, led a group of countries, which were called "bio-geo-political counterparts endangered species." (7) They say they will be lost unless the U.S. zahochut or fail to do more than its obligations to them. Typically, in the first place among these endangered countries he put Georgia on Taiwan. The list also found in Belarus and Ukraine. It is easy to see the suggestive meaning of similar allegations, imposing these states vigilance against Russia.

In general, a "strategic vision" is a typical inversion, when verbally as Brzezinski would be removed from the old concepts of "American hegemony" and "global leadership", but introduced them to the new definition is essentially aimed at the same thing. Future "double" as he writes Brzezinski sees America's role in the fact that "it must be a channel and a guarantor of unity extended to the West, and at once — a peacemaker and mediator between naikrupneyshimi powers of the East." (8)

With all of this confirmation the need to maintain leadership of the United States, although in the recent shell, built it on the fact that in the world there is no power that could become in the near and long term, in their place. Surely, it is. What does not want to recognize or accept Brzezinski, perhaps surprisingly, it's the ability of a democratic system of international relations without clearly defined state leaders.

The claim that without mentoring America the rest of the population of the earth entangled in contradictions and "disappear" completely untenable by natural occurrences. In almost all the regional conflicts and global dilemmas of America's role destructive faster than the roll. For example, the chief of the situation in the Middle East, the question of Palestinian-Israeli conflict can not be solved for decades, first, because of the obstructionist stance of Washington. The international community has long been worked out and agreed on a fairly strong foundation of peace between Palestinians and Israelis. Everyone understands that the case only for the snow-white house. The crisis in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, exciting the whole of Central and South Asia — as a consequence of the imperial ambitions of the United States. Eagerness to acquire weapons of mass destruction by a number of countries not on whether there is that there is a very clear threat to their independence on the part of the American "civilize"? Applets re many powers, including Russia and China, and how much due to that the perimeter of their borders lasts expansion of U.S. military bases and formation against their formal and informal military alliances, the construction of any kind of missile shield? What is the main obstacle to the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol regarding greenhouse gas emissions? The U.S. position. The same can be said of many other important concepts of global dilemmas.

Sorting out these problems one by one, it is easy to see that without the intervention of the United States, they could be addressed more successfully. Where did such an absurd world that without the Yankees all the world's population necessarily will be thrown into a war of all against all in accordance with the doctrine of Huntington? On the contrary, assuming the purpose of the intermediary and the policeman in all regional conflicts, Washington impartially becomes a party interested in their never-ending nezatuhanii, for only in this makarom he can in the next claim to be the "indispensable power" with all the benefits of this status. An old as the hills, imperial principle of "divide and conquer" it's best to realize precisely at this position. We take the liberty to say that America is, of course, is not a "black hole" and from the map will not disappear, but at the same time without irritating her eagerness to interfere in everything and manage everything else on the planet earth people more successfully and completely peacefully would solve many long-standing disputes. Almost all shows that the future is not necessarily to be messy, and can be cooperated on the principles of the "concert of majestic powers," and its new members as they mature. The real challenge of the "American devolution" should have been done, as it may be, the transformation of America "equal midst of equals." But Brzezinski from that goal, of course, infinitely far away, as long as, and to the whole South American elite. As can be seen, we can expect that the described processes will take them very painful and for America, and for the rest of the world.

And another is on the mind — the recipes offered by Brzezinski for the recovery of the U.S. itself. It's just a deja vu. This recollection that one of his advisers appeared no one else like Misha Gorbachev. Brzezinski talks glibly about the need for restructuring and renewal in America, calls for the newcomer thinking, mobilization is deeply rooted spiritual forces of society, although previously noted the lack of this feature as one of the circumstances of the weakening of the future of the country. Is that a publicity until says. Is not the latest sign that the U.S. really are in a position late Russian Union? Such feeble appeals for themselves by themselves reflect the depth of the systemic crisis, in what turned out to not only all of America, and its intellectual elite.

(1) Zbigniew Brzezinski. "Strategic glance: America and the Global Crisis." M. Astrel, 2012, p.9.
(2) Ibid, p.33.
(3) Ibid, p.56.
(4) Ibid, p.234.
(5) Ibid, p.222.
(6) Ibid, p.212.
(7) Ibid, p.136.
(8) In the same place, s.276.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: