BRZEZINSKI RECOGNIZED THE SITUATION ON THE CHESSBOARD AS NO-WIN

World mass-media republish and comment an interview of Zbigniew Brzezinski — American authority on global strategy — to the Polish newspaper "Polityka¹" that was published on the 19th of July. Well-known author of the "Great chessboard" concept, Brzezinski is an inspiration to the foreign policy of the Democratic U. S. presidents (Carter, Clinton and Obama). He believes our world to be at the threshold of some great changes, which can have a bad impact on America.

Brzezinski gives 25 years to clarify the destiny of Russia

World mass-media republish and comment an interview of Zbigniew Brzezinski — American authority on global strategy — to the Polish newspaper "Polityka" that was published on the 19th of July. Well-known author of the "Great chessboard" concept, Brzezinski is an inspiration to the foreign policy of the Democratic U. S. presidents (Carter, Clinton and Obama). He believes our world to be at the threshold of some great changes, which can have a bad impact on America.

As far back as in 1977-1981 Brzezinski has been Homeland Security Advisor at the James Carter office. That was the very time when the last round of the Cold War started. In 1993-2001 Brzezinski was undercover but still the most authoritative Bill Clinton’ aide on the matters of foreign policy. That period is characterized by the American aggression against Serbia and the start rapid NATO expansion to the East. Now, during Barack Obama term, Brzezinski occupies his usual "shadow State Secretary" post. And it is him, who covertly defines main directions of the strongest world power’ foreign policy. Or, as Brzezinski put it in this interview, "I give the scripts and answer how America should react in the situation".

Brzezinski established himself a reputation of ardent and uncompromising enemy of "Russian imperialism". He doesn’t forget about this role of his even today, speaking of our country with an authoritative Polish edition. He told exactly the kind of things Poles wanted to hear: "Speaking of Russia I am an optimist, because I am a pessimist towards the Russian state itself. I am a pessimist towards Russia’s chances to achieve its former imperial goals. Russia hasn’t got that potential anymore. It becomes obvious when you look at the economic, demographic, scientific statistics. Leave alone its geopolitical neighborhood: strong overpopulated Asian states surround Russia from the east and south. Russia has no choice. It has to face the West and the West itself wants it to go this way".

Interpreting it into normal language, this would mean the following: luckily for Brzezinski, Russia won’t be able to play its own great independent role anymore — especially against Asia. Its destiny is to stay at the periphery of geopolitical and geo-economic systems. These systems are to be created under the aegis of the USA and/or Western Europe, being simultaneously protected from the direct contact with "strong overpopulated Asian states" by Russia.

At the same time Brzezinski denies the idea of equal partnership with Russia, covering this with the political realism concept. He places Russia entering NATO on the same footing as the actual destruction of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. He disputes it: "NATO is an organization featuring widespread military collaboration. All of its members have mutual access to military data of each other. Would Russia be willing to bear American officers sitting in Moscow and observing its military plans? Would America be willing to bear the same Russian presence in Brussels or Washington? These ideas are unreasonable."

Brzezinski realizes that the lot he assigned for Russia is just a possible outlook but not the gained end: "I think, during the next 20-25 years this process will change the interpretation of Russia’s essence". In general, there is nothing new in Brzezinski’s opinion. That’s why it is even more interesting to learn about his view towards the U. S. and Western European prospects in our rapidly changing world.

U. S. crisis and "quite a mess" in the rest of the world

First of all, American geopolitics specialist frightens everyone with the possible consequences in case if America’s role on the planet weakens: "If America loses its leading role in the world now, there would be no state capable of taking its place...Looking forward over next historical period (20-40 years), I don’t see the country, which can stabilize the world in a same way America does. American crisis will turn into worldwide crisis. [This would be] quite a mess: conflicts, economic crisis, political or religious games everywhere. It would be different in the different regions of the world."

Well-known geostrategist is laconic, but he hides real anxiety about emerged state of things and the prospects of the USA behind it. Brzezinski makes it clear that no centre of power can threaten the current international status of the USA. Domestic U. S. problems are much more significant.

Military budget of America is bigger than the budgets of all the other states together... [Its] superiority is great and it will remain so for a long time. No full-scale war threatens America. At the same time little wars — which are costly in financial and moral senses — do. It weakens America and changes situation. This is evolution, historical process... A lot of things depend on whether Obama would manage to change the American role in the world. If he’d be able to push America in some different direction of foreign and domestic policy, it may have the potential. This potential is necessary for America to continue playing main part in the world for tens of years. If he’d fail, changes will go faster and may become really dramatic".

Restrained Brzezinski’ words are very expressive: [Obama] is busy with serious internal crisis in America. It is not only oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Entire American financial system demands reforms. The same situation is with accounting system, education. Obama perfectly senses what America is to do in the world and he sets the direction. However, he seemingly devotes at most 2 hours out of 12 to the international issues". So he seems to be justifying for the failures of American foreign policy: we have our own business "through the roof" for now...

It is characteristic that American geopolitician tells nothing about the type of changes, which Obama is to bring into the policy of the USA for it to corresponded to its global role — the one that country tries to play. We can get the concept of this using the picture of the world processes, given to us by Brzezinski, though. This picture symbolizes menaces to present stands of America: "there is a lot of uncertainty in the world stability, alignment of political powers and the role of the East. Major portion of this politically-awoken world appreciates Western role negatively. Certain historical images prevail in the world — colonialism, imperialism, exploitation, make up essential parts of them... A lot depends on whether miraculous Chinese development will continue or not. And will India, Indonesia and Brazil manage to repeat Chinese miracle? Of course, we don’t know it. But everything is possible. We are at the beginning of some new era".

America wants to have a rest to reclaim its former status

There is yet another pessimistic motif in Brzezinski’ reasoning. It is his doubts regarding the European Union future in spite of his positive assessment of this institution: "What Europe managed to do is truly a breakthrough, but we have a reason to pity that this process didn’t go further and probably even strted to reverse at the moment. Next 5-10 years will be considered as the time of disintegration".

So, what is to become the essence of that coming "new era", which Brzezinski implies? Obviously that part of American élite that he represents, realizes that the "triumphal march of Western values" had stopped. Rollback is beginning. Neither America, nor Europe can claim themselves to be the role model for the rest of the world. Eastern Asia, South Asia and Latin America hold themselves out as the independent civilization centers.

It is not an accident that Brzezinski talks a lot about domestic U. S. problems. Of course it is not a renunciation of prevailing role of America in the world. And it is definitely not a fear of these problems. Our "hero" clearly realizes that at first America should look into its own problems. Last decade has shown that Americans can’t be distracted from their domestic concerns with the foreign-policy affairs. Presence of American troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Balkans didn’t solve a single American problem and became an irritating factor for lots of Americans by itself. Under these circumstances it became clear that the USA don’t have the benefit of interfering affairs all over the world in that fierce manner they used to. Speaking of "simmering conflicts", it probably means that we cannot expect America-inspired escalation of situation at the Korean Peninsula, Persian Gulf or around Iran unless something extraordinary happens.

Given situation like that, Russian evolution takes on special significance for the USA. According to the Brzezinski’ picture, in the mentioned term of next 20-25 years Russia is to become a cover for American world system, while the USA is saving its strength for a new global expansionary spurt. So Russia can by no means play a role of an independent and civilized country. It should be just a protector and a loudspeaker of the Western values for the "strong overpopulated Asian states".

Brzezinski is seriously concerned with the fact that pending domestic problems, accumulated by former republic administration, can prevent America from playing its main role. And probably it is not a bluff. In this case we may expect carrot to prevail in Washington stick and carrot policy regarding Moscow. The only aim of it though is to make Russia a champion of American interests in Asia and Latin America (which do not contradict the Western-European ones). Mildly but persistently — having been shown that we have "no other choice — we are to become a "democratic frontier", turned against everyone, whom Russia does not actually oppose.

By Jaroslav Butakov

¹ The Politics (Pol.)