{"id":81,"date":"2014-05-29T21:59:41","date_gmt":"2014-05-29T19:59:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/jkoehler.diskstation.me\/wordpress\/?p=81"},"modified":"2018-01-24T16:13:55","modified_gmt":"2018-01-24T15:13:55","slug":"the-war-in-mind","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/jkoehler.diskstation.me\/wordpress\/2014\/05\/the-war-in-mind\/","title":{"rendered":"The war in mind"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

I am increasingly interested in the radicalising views expressed in Russian mainstream media on the relationship between Russia and the “West”. According to some publically acceptable points of view are those who see Russia with its few remaining allies already engulfed in an existential struggle against facism and an imperialism of cultural decay.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

There is this strange believe that the West is in essence about sexual minority rights and public nudity. To an extend the Western democracies are, indeed, about limiting the states power to educate society on morality and enforce restrictive laws on issues like sexual orientation or public dresscodes. Limiting the vertical power of the state and of powerful local as well as regional alternatives to the state (renegade commanders, warlords, “oligarchs” setting up their own zones of territorial control, and, of course, of late “zelennyt chelovechki”) should be one of the more attracktive aspects of the soft power of Western democraties.<\/p>\n

On the hard end of state power there have also been some limits. Thus far NATO has not attacked and occupied countries to take them over. Neither Serbia, Kosovo or Afghanistan have been annexed. Same holds for Iraq (though this was no NATO war). In the eastern European neighbourhood Russia appears to be more of a push factor for countries and societies to “bang on the doors of NATO” as Eduard Shevardnadze once put it. If Russia really was an attractive alternative it would not constantly have to resort to brute power and blackmail in order to assert its interests; and Western institutions like NATO or the EU would have a much harder time to extend their influence in a region dominated by Russia for a considerable amount of time. Governing by positive incentives – being attractive not only to totally corrupt elites but to the wider public – is cheaper than sending the army and twisting arms.
\nTrue, the US and British led a war of aggression against Iraq, true, NATO broke international law in Kosovo (for reasons I personally find justified \u2013 the dimension of the manmade humanitarian catastrophe affected Europe directly and left few decent options; what was politically stupid was the recognition of Kosovo as an independent state later on), true, Saakashvili messed up and Russia took the opportunity to draw a red line it had hitherto been unable to enforce with political or diplomatic means. But the mistakes of others and political weakness and unattractiveness of Russia are poor arguments to justify the current reckless and high risk course of action that country has taken.
\nAnd repeating the Kremlin songline, as some on the far left and far right in Europe do, that Russian (irregular) forces are there in neighbouring countries to protect Russians (i.e. ethnic Russians, passport Russians, Russian speakers, little Russian, zemlyaki) from fascists that “the West” is backing is plain silly. It is also a cynical caricature of the very sizable parts of society in Ukraine and other post-soviet countries who do not envision their future locked into post-modern authoritarianism just because they are geographically exposed to a Russian empire in agony.<\/span><\/p>\n

Collection of recent articles :<\/p>\n