Mitch Polman on Wed, 21 Apr 1999 12:00:33 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Finally, a sane Russian |
[orig to <[email protected]>; cleaned up.] David Johnson promised me that he would be posting thispiece by the well-respected political commentator Leonid Batkin. Batkin lambastes Russian policy in the Yugoslav crisis. He points-out that Russia stands alone with Belarus in supporting Milosevic. (Cross-posting of comments only) From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 09:46:30 -0400 Subject: David Johnson <[email protected]>: Batkin article I'll be sending out tomorrow --------- Begin forwarded message ---------- From: David Johnson <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Batkin article I'll be sending out tomorrow Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:46:52 -0400 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Vremya-MN 14 April 1999 The Third Axial Period by Leonid Batkin [translated by Rachel Dubin] I support NATO's military action, sympathize with its aims, and wish it success. And I am ashamed of those who condemn it; my friends are among them, too. But it is no aggression whatsoever. I have not seen for many years such an amount of lies and stupidity, which has generally poured forth in the last two weeks Chatter about brother Slavs, and imperial chatter, seems to me to be a continuous lie. There are brother Slav Serbs. But there are other Slavs too--brother Croats, brother Macedonians, brother Slovenes, brothers in Bosnia. For some reason, Russia has behaved entirely differently when it comes to Bosnia. There are brother Bulgarians, who are bursting into NATO; brother Czechs and brother Poles, who are already in NATO. Therefore, when we shout about NATO aggression, about the role of the world policeman, it concerns Poles and Czechs, too. In general, we must realize that we have business not with NATO, but with all of Europe. Even Ukraine looks at it differently than Russia. We are staying in complete isolation from all of Europe by being in Lukashenko's [Belarusan president--R.D] company. We are supporting the last communist regime--that bloody ulcer--in Europe. The West and especially united Europe could not relate to this indifferently. But by an extreme measure, negotiations have been conducted for more than a year. They [the Serbs--R.D.] were persuaded not to drive the Kosovars from Yugoslav command, and not to infringe on its territorial integrity. Only one thing remained--for Milosevic to agree to grant wide autonomy, and as they were already shooting there and hating each other for 10 years, neutral troops, which would not shoot at this or the other side, of course had to be brought in. What kind of troops? Right away, an answer suggested itself--UN troops, or, shall we say, troops with the sanction of the UN Security Council. Milosevic refused the presence of what would be foreign soldiers on the territory of Kosovo. NATO is accused of breaking international law. But the persecution of people for their beliefs, based on ethnicity or religion, is not some country's internal matter. Russia's guilt lies in its UN veto decision and in the fact that NATO military forces, not UN peacekeeping forces, the so-called "blue helmets," are acting in Yugoslavia. This is a result of Primakov's policy, which is a direct continuation of Soviet imperial policies. In general, the right of veto has become obsolete. Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt established it. It was reasonable at that time. For there were two opposing world powers; a situation in which one of these powers could, by a simple majority, use the UN like an instrument had to be precluded. Now, the right of veto must be changed and decisions made, for example, by a three-fourths vote. Incidentally, a four-fifths vote of those who voted for an action has taken place in recent Security Council voting. The only thing Russia has to do now is to convene the UN Security Council to propose a cessation of military actions and an introduction of UN "blue helmets." Milosevic would be driven into a corner; the West would heave a sigh of relief. For the Western countries do not entirely feel like continuing to be tied up in it. And Russia would earn respect. I support NATO's action. But this does not mean that I am ecstatic over this action. They cannot be ecstatic themselves, either. This is an emergency action. It is risky and has turned out to be considered impossible in the end. Meanwhile, as a result, we have in Kosovo a tragedy called a humanitarian catastrophe. Bringing in or not bringing in ground troops is also an open question. >From the point of view of world history, the totalitarian regimes, world wars, and all other cataclysms created by the 20th century, are convulsions, so frightening and tragic, of a tormentous transition to new forms of existence. We have entered a third axial period. The axial period is a term suggested by Carl Jaspers [German Existentialist philosopher, 1883-1969--R.D.] during the emergence of the first civilizations in ancient China, India, Sumeria, Egypt, and others. I am suggesting that the term "second axial period" relate to the emergence of a new European civilization in Western Europe in the 15th-18th centuries and the "third axial period," to the consolidation of this process in the 19th century. And although I can chatter about it with a perfect spirit, I believe, however, that this is a time that will lead to world government, to the unity of humanity. This is an old dream, Kant's dream of an eternal world, of one humanity, which not long ago was called an ironic smile. However, Sakharov, for a long time looking forward, inserted the memory of world government into a project of the Russian constitution. It is illustrated by the process of the European Union, the European Parliament, and the Schengen agreement. After two years, the franc, the mark, and the lira will disappear; a single currency, the euro, will appear in their place. England's island posture has lost its meaning. Because England will no longer fight with the French, as during Napoleon's time, or with Germany, as during the two World Wars. People have always dreamed of a world without wars. So, therefore, there will be no more wars in Europe. There cannot be war in North America, either. And what is happening now are final outbursts connected with backward enclaves. These are the last squalls of those storms which have raged in Europe for thousands of years. There will be no more of them. In which volumes wine should be produced or beef should be exported will only be argued about. What we have now is happening not only on account of events in Yugoslavia, that creation of absurdity, lack of logic, nonsense, thoughtlessness, of absence of a needed scale for addressing these questions, and if possible, the shortage of patriotism. The understanding of patriotism changes, like everything in the world. I think that in these times, a Russian patriot is a person who is acutely aware of the history of his country and of how it changes over time, not only comparing the present with the past, but also looking at the future. --- # distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: [email protected]