Grigory Yavlinsky’s web-site, 23.09.2020

At the UN General Assembly, Vladimir Putin again spoke about a multipolar world. But a “multipolar world” means that one pole will have almost the whole world, the other will include China with North Korea, and on the third pole, apart from everyone else, Russia with Lukashenko, Novichok and missiles.

A “multipolar world” in the Lavrov-Putin’s understanding means that when state lies and torture, hybrid wars and “polite people”, dictating to neighbours and seizing foreign territories, using chemical weapons and beating up peaceful protesters are permissible in Russia and the surrounding area; when the irreplaceable power corporation imposes, for decades, all this on the people as the only possible way of life.

In this system, the only value is the power itself, its preservation and retention. The idea of ​​“pupation” of the controlled space, rolling it into a “sovereign” cocoon, separated from the rest of the world, serves to this too.

This Putin’s idea is deeply flawed from the outset, because it denies global peace as a phenomenon. However, the modern world, even divided and fragmented by the current turmoil, has general patterns and trends, which are completely wrong to ignore in human terms, and irresponsible and criminal at the state level.

If you want to be a part of the global world, if you want to participate in decision-making, then you will have to abandon the policy based on the principle “I do what I want”.

By the way, what kind of a “sovereign pole” can we talk about with such an ineffective economy as that of Russia. What equal rights can the “poles” have when the United States and the European Union have 44 per cent of the world GDP for two of them, China has 16 per cent, and Russia has 2 per cent. The entire present Russia’s “sovereign pole” is only fear-mongering of missiles (and now also of toxic substances) at 2 per cent of the world GDP.

So, our “pole” is tiny. We’d better take the lead in the struggle for peace, so that everyone would be together, so that to sit at the table – either in G5, or G7, or G8 – and make decisions. But Putin with his “multipolar world” can only sit together with Lukashnko.

This is the key difference between the national interests and the interests of the government. For Putin, the main goal is the self-preservation of the current ruling corporation, and the national interest and patriotism are loyalty to the authorities. However, this understanding deprives the country and the people of the future. The Russian state – and it should be regarded as an institution, rather than a collection of personalities – is destroyed and delegitimised by such a policy. All real values ​​- Christian, European, national, and any values in general – are crudely instrumentalised, adapted to the pragmatic tasks of retaining personal power. This also applies to the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, which in the Putin’s system is used as a prop for phantom claims for a “new Yalta”.

Resolving the impasse and gaining perspective is in the opposite direction: in the politics of common fundamental values ​​and principles, and all talk about the need to jointly solve common problems will remain talk only without mutual understanding and acceptance of these values and principles by the main global actors.

Source

Grigory Yavlinsky

is Chairman of the Federal Political Committee of the Russian United Democratic Party YABLOKO, Vice President of Liberal International, PhD in Economics, Professor of the National Research University Higher School of Economics.