[R-P] Financial Times advierte: no sigan hostigando a Rusia...

[Nestor Gorojovsky]

[Disculpen que no traduzca esa interesante nota del diario inglés 
Financial Times ("Una aproximación hipócrita hacia Rusia"), donde el 
estratega conservador Anatol  Lieven advierte contra los excesos en 
el hostigamiento a Rusia.  Solo traduzco los últimos dos párrafos, 
que surgen naturalmente de la argumentación anterior, originada en la 
inquietud que le provoca a Lieven el hecho de que si bien los EEUU 
pueden desentenderse de Rusia por 100 años, los europeos no:

A los estrategas de Occidente les vendría bien plantearse el 
siguiente experimentito mental:  imagínense qué respondería el Sr. 
Cheney -y el estáblishment y la población de los EEUU en general- si 
se le hicieran exigencias geopolíticas equivalentes a las que está 
enfrentando Rusia.  ¿Cómo reaccionarían ante la extensión de una 
alianza militar hostil hasta México, el derrocamiento de gobiernos 
clientelares de EEUU en América Central, y la expulsión de la marina 
estadounidense de Pearl Harbor?

Aquí no importa si los procesos en juego son "democráticos" o no.  
Los EEUU lucharían a muerte para impedirlo.  No sé si Rusia hará lo 
mismo en el futuro.  Tampoco quiero hacer la prueba.

***********************************************************

Original en inglés, gentileza de la lista A-List:

A hypocritical approach to Russia 
By Anatol Lieven 
Financial Times: May 31 2006

If you are a European, there may be many things you can do or say 
about Russia, but one thing you cannot do is ignore it. In 100 years' 
time, it may be that the US will take very little interest in what 
Russia does.

That can never be true of those who share the European continent with 
it.

 At present, the internal problems of the European Union have led to 
Europe essentially tagging along behind US policy, though sometimes 
complaining and trying to act as a brake. If US policy towards Russia 
continues along existing lines, the result may be a crisis which will 
wreck relations with the west for decades to come.

 This applies especially to US pressure for an early enlargement of 
Nato to include Ukraine - something which, according to opinion 
polls, is opposed by some two-thirds of Ukrainians. If the west does 
expand Nato in this way, it will take on a permanent commitment to 
defend Ukraine, not only against Russia, but against internal revolt. 
This commitment would remain, regardless of how the geopolitical 
balance or the situation within Ukraine might change in the future.

 Such a commitment - and such a potential crisis - might still be 
acceptable if the west were sure of its ability to confront Russia on 
the territory of the former Soviet Union; if, for example, it were 
certain that it could quickly back up Ukraine's Nato membership with 
EU membership and full social, economic and political integration 
into the west. But as developments in both Ukraine and the EU itself 
make clear, this hope is almost certainly an empty one. The results 
of the Ukrainian parliamentary elections in March have revealed a 
population deeply divided on the country's future course. Meanwhile, 
European officials admit candidly in private that given the economic 
stagnation of western Europe and the problems caused by the first 
round of EU enlargement, membership for Ukraine will be impossible 
for the foreseeable future. At the same time, American power is going 
to be diverted from Europe by challenges in the Muslim world and 
China.

 One fundamental European problem in formulating policy towards 
Russia is a conceptual one. European attitudes are founded on the 
belief that Russia must be made to accept the domestic and 
international codes of behaviour generally followed by states that 
are members of the EU. Since Russia is often far from following these 
rules, a tough European approach seems, on the face of it, to be 
justified.

 This approach to Europe's neighbours is one that has had 
considerable success, such as in the case of Turkey. However, Europe 
has shown infinitely more patience and courtesy with regard to 
Turkey's tortuous progress in recent decades than it has towards 
Russia in the years since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

 But when it comes to Russia, the European approach suffers from two 
obvious flaws. The first is that, unlike Turkey, Russia is not being 
offered any prospect of EU membership in return for its compliance 
with EU rules. Nor, of course, unlike Turkey, is Russia ever likely 
to be a member of Nato. So in the security field, Russia is being 
asked to make enormous concessions with no real western help in 
return.

 The other European problem is that the EU model is not the only one 
in the world today. There is another extremely influential teacher - 
the US. Under an increasingly thin cover of promoting "democracy" and 
"freedom", the Bush administration has, in fact, been pursuing a 
crudely realist approach to the maximisation of American power and 
the weakening of any real or perceived rivals.

 This realist approach has been exemplified by the career of Dick 
Cheney.

It was on show again when, immediately after his recent speech in 
Vilnius attacking Russia for its lack of democracy, the US vice-
president went on to forge new ties with the oil-rich dictators in 
Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan, and to seek to draw them into an anti-
Russian alliance. Confronted with this harshly realist American 
approach on their borders, it is hardly surprising that Russia is 
following very similar policies in response.

 In this regard, western policymakers might like to engage in a small 
thought experiment: to imagine the response of Mr Cheney - and of the 
American establishment and population in general - in the face of 
geopolitical demands similar to those now being faced by Russia. How 
would they react to the extension of a hostile international military 
alliance to Mexico; the overthrow of US client states in Central 
America; and the expulsion of the US Navy from Pearl Harbor?

No matter how "democratic" the processes involved, the US would fight 
to the death to prevent this. Whether Russia will fight at some point 
in future, I do not know. I also do not want to conduct that 
experiment.

 The writer is a senior research fellow at the New America 
Foundation.

His next book, Ethical Realism: A Vision for America's Role in the 
World, co-authored with John Hulsman, is to be published by Pantheon 
in October

Este correo lo ha enviado
Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky
nestorgoro en fibertel.com.ar
[No necesariamente es su autor]
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 
"La patria tiene que ser la dignidad arriba y el regocijo abajo".
Aparicio Saravia
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _