The New Dark Age

The debates have gained momentum after the crisis in the Trans-Caucasus in August and afterwards. The buzz is that a new equation has emerged in the world. The US presidential debates too have got hotter while focusing on this subject. The Republican candidate, John McCain criticised Russia for its ‘irresponsible behaviour’, suggested driving it out from the G8 and advocated stringent measures to control its policies. The Western media went vocal in criticising ‘brutishness’ of the bear and labelled Russia ‘a gangster state,’ and so on. Some commentators compared the Russian actions to actions of Nazi Germany. These developments however did not lead to any kind of settlement of peace in the region nor generated good will but panoply of actions and reactions.

Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister, Sergei Ivanov, few days back made it clear that Russia is not going to attack its neighbours as it respects their sovereignty, though it would not forgo its security concerns. Prime Minister Putin declared that the beleaguered Georgian president got a ‘punch on the face’ as a response to his actions in South Ossetia. The Russian-Georgian face off can not be confined to local politics as it holds wider implications for international politics. It has also impacted the epistemological underpinnings of a new cold war discourse. From a Russian perspective, Russia’s actions in trans-Caucasus can be seen as a decisive show to portray Russia as an assertive power which takes reciprocal actions against the developments in Kosovo orchestrated by the West.

Issues such as anti-missile shield in Europe and Luguvoi controversy have further sharpened the polarisations. It appeared antagonisms are irreparable. Russia’s President Medvedev’s 26 September announcement of construction of ‘guaranteed nuclear deterrent system’ and a new ‘aerospace defence system’ by 2020 reflected that coming years may witness more such announcements. In another move, to worry the US and the EU, in Tehran on 21 October 2008 Russia, Iran and Qatar deliberated to strengthen cooperation and to set up a gas cartel in the style of OPEC. Russia has demonstrated its capacity to strike its perceived enemies and countering actions which are perceived against its interests in the region. It also demonstrated that it can interrupt and challenge the energy security of the West, as the pipeline that passes through Georgia is not far from the Ossetian region. Now South Ossetia under its influence, Russia would be able to influence the West’s energy policies in the region.

In this background, the concerns of the West to Russia’s assertion are understandable with the fact Russia, till a decade ago a lost power with a fragile economy and polity, has risen enough to challenge the reigning world order. Russia appears to have adopted a calibrated policy by calling for the European integration without the American strings. That was what exactly in Putin’s mind, when during his visit to Europe recently he envisaged European integration without support from the other side of the Atlantic. It is also well known that Russia has avowedly opposed the expansion of NATO towards its borders.

However, it may be naïve to conclude that Russia would have a smooth sail in its policies after the developments in its south. Besides the global slow down which has affected the world market, slashing the oil prices almost to half, Russia now focuses on its domestic economic management. Even on political front it has almost insurmountable problems. In its support to South Ossetian and Abkhazian statehood so far no country has come forward except tiny Nicaragua. The UN, the EU and the US aside, the supposedly closer Sanghai Cooperation Organisation too adopted a couched language not to appear overtly supportive of Russia’s actions in Georgia. Also China’s rising clout, its economic sinews, and its increasing influence in global affairs contain in them the seed of probable confrontation between Russia and China.

Though the future of the world would likely be multipolar as the post-cold war world civilisation abhors a unipolar structure, it is still unclear what the future of the world exactly to be. Despite the rise of China and its projection as a global power, it has still not been accepted by majority of nations as a transparent and responsible power. Hence, its rise as an alternative pole to the US may not go well with the policies of other powers including Russia.

Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov made it clear that Russia is going to shape the foreign policy discourse which is not going to revolve around a unipolar world order. His assertion that Russia is not going to turn a blind eye to the developments in its neighbourhood is an indication that a lot of churning would take place in Central Eurasian region in coming years. Russia’s actions in Georgia might have generated by its perceived security interests, but its actions may lead to trade non-cooperation of some significant EU countries with Russia, which may affect Russia’s economic development.

Any future configuration of world order may not be feasible without Russia at one centre. Besides Russia, the US, India, China, Japan, the EU would be definitely the other poles. In fact, the developments in trans-Caucasus in particular and in Central Eurasia in general may serve as a prelude to the coming of a new world order. In this order, a new approach bereft of antagonism and violence would be needed to mould bilateral and multilateral relations. The US and Russia being the global powers can not shed responsibilities for the fruition of this new order. Hopefully, the next president of the US would make this objective one of his priorities.

Source: Strategic Culture Foundation