Russia’s invasion of Ukraine constitutes the most graphic evidence yet that the unipolar American era—the era in which Washington was the only great power that launched major wars—is over. The American foreign policy establishment has been adapting to this shift for several years. American progressives have not. What would it mean if we did?
The reality of the multipolar world means recognising that other great powers like China and Russia have their own spheres of influence just like we have had ours going back to the Monroe Doctrine more than 200 years ago. In turn that means supporting Obama’s attempts to ‘reset’ the relationship with Russia, not becoming hysterical every time Trump tried to pursue a similar policy of dialogue or rapprochement with Putin, not supporting the Maidan revolution that overthrew a corrupt but democratically elected President of Ukraine, and vigorously supporting a policy of applying diplomatic pressure on our European allies to broker a neutrality and protection of Russian minorities v/s sovereignty and EU economic sphere deal between Russia and Ukraine. Who knows if this would have avoided war. But is it not a concrete, realistic and decent set of policies that progressives could have got behind?
Thank you. Really appreciate this clear-eyed description of and advocacy for how an American progressive should think about foreign policy in today's world.
The 'blob' may have moved away from the global war on terror to great power competition, but I believe it still sees the US as the world's sole superpower. The unipolar world was an anomaly that lasted a few decades. It's over, and the question is, can the US deal with it. If the US continues with the delusional belief that it can project sufficient power to the other side of the world to dictate behavior over there, it will either start WW3 or bankrupt the country, or both. NATO is an arm of US power, an organization that creates the very problems it purports to solve. The US doesn't want to give up on NATO, but negotiations on further NATO expansion are necessary to stop the current madness.
Thank you, Peter. I am impressed by your balance, fair, and objective opinion. The West has mastered double standard and the art of hypocrisy for a long time. Now they should pause and look in the mirror. It is not right to "stand-up for Democracy, and Freedom..." by mouth, and destroy entire countries like Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Palestine, and flooding Europe with refugees. Meanwhile, the West loves "their" dictators. Consistency is overdue. Look who is calling on the Int'l Court of Justice now to intervene in Ukraine now....
Yes us evil Americans. How dare we expand NATO to Russia’s border?
Huh? It was the former Soviet countries which wanted to join? Well….too bad we made Ukraine want to join NATO…what? They only wanted to join AFTER Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014? Hmmm…
Perhaps this both sides crap is BS, perhaps there isn’t much in common between Iraq and Ukraine at all
Maybe, Peter, progressive views of the world have some serious flaws which must be examined
I heartily agree with your call for American Progressives to develop an updated and more nuanced approach to foreign policy.
With respect to how the US applies sanctions, it's timely to address this one: Trump's embargo on Venezuela. (Gregg Palast has recently written about this.) Aside from its humanitarian rationale (which would probably fall on deaf ears in Congress), it could have the effect of undermining Putin's/Russia's windfall from rising fuel costs. As you and most commenters here probably know, Venezuela sits on the largest oil reserve in the world -- by far -- and has the capability to pump 2 million barrels/day for export. Unleashing this would cause the price of oil to plummet. (I'll reiterate that I believe we shouldn't be choking Venezuela's economy, but I don't think that's the selling point to lead with in at the moment.)
As Palast writes," So let’s make a deal: We recognize the elected government in Venezuela and Putin recognizes the elected government of Ukraine. And if Putin doesn’t like that deal, we still recognize Venezuela, and unleash their oil, without doubt the greatest weapon on this battlefield."
Thank you
Thank you
Thanks
The reality of the multipolar world means recognising that other great powers like China and Russia have their own spheres of influence just like we have had ours going back to the Monroe Doctrine more than 200 years ago. In turn that means supporting Obama’s attempts to ‘reset’ the relationship with Russia, not becoming hysterical every time Trump tried to pursue a similar policy of dialogue or rapprochement with Putin, not supporting the Maidan revolution that overthrew a corrupt but democratically elected President of Ukraine, and vigorously supporting a policy of applying diplomatic pressure on our European allies to broker a neutrality and protection of Russian minorities v/s sovereignty and EU economic sphere deal between Russia and Ukraine. Who knows if this would have avoided war. But is it not a concrete, realistic and decent set of policies that progressives could have got behind?
Peter, your columns are too long.
Thank you. Really appreciate this clear-eyed description of and advocacy for how an American progressive should think about foreign policy in today's world.
The 'blob' may have moved away from the global war on terror to great power competition, but I believe it still sees the US as the world's sole superpower. The unipolar world was an anomaly that lasted a few decades. It's over, and the question is, can the US deal with it. If the US continues with the delusional belief that it can project sufficient power to the other side of the world to dictate behavior over there, it will either start WW3 or bankrupt the country, or both. NATO is an arm of US power, an organization that creates the very problems it purports to solve. The US doesn't want to give up on NATO, but negotiations on further NATO expansion are necessary to stop the current madness.
Thank you, Peter. I am impressed by your balance, fair, and objective opinion. The West has mastered double standard and the art of hypocrisy for a long time. Now they should pause and look in the mirror. It is not right to "stand-up for Democracy, and Freedom..." by mouth, and destroy entire countries like Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Palestine, and flooding Europe with refugees. Meanwhile, the West loves "their" dictators. Consistency is overdue. Look who is calling on the Int'l Court of Justice now to intervene in Ukraine now....
Yes us evil Americans. How dare we expand NATO to Russia’s border?
Huh? It was the former Soviet countries which wanted to join? Well….too bad we made Ukraine want to join NATO…what? They only wanted to join AFTER Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014? Hmmm…
Perhaps this both sides crap is BS, perhaps there isn’t much in common between Iraq and Ukraine at all
Maybe, Peter, progressive views of the world have some serious flaws which must be examined
Excellent! Thank you............
I heartily agree with your call for American Progressives to develop an updated and more nuanced approach to foreign policy.
With respect to how the US applies sanctions, it's timely to address this one: Trump's embargo on Venezuela. (Gregg Palast has recently written about this.) Aside from its humanitarian rationale (which would probably fall on deaf ears in Congress), it could have the effect of undermining Putin's/Russia's windfall from rising fuel costs. As you and most commenters here probably know, Venezuela sits on the largest oil reserve in the world -- by far -- and has the capability to pump 2 million barrels/day for export. Unleashing this would cause the price of oil to plummet. (I'll reiterate that I believe we shouldn't be choking Venezuela's economy, but I don't think that's the selling point to lead with in at the moment.)
As Palast writes," So let’s make a deal: We recognize the elected government in Venezuela and Putin recognizes the elected government of Ukraine. And if Putin doesn’t like that deal, we still recognize Venezuela, and unleash their oil, without doubt the greatest weapon on this battlefield."