Russia in Global Affairs

The Central Asian countries clearly intend to develop relations with all major powers other than Russia with which they have longstanding ties.

One of the characteristics of the new order is the status of rising regional powers, which along with great powers have got an opportunity to play their own independent role, commensurate with their national power. Regional powers seek to adjust their own national interests according to the changing geopolitical environment. In this respect, we have entered the era of “A World for All.”

It's premature to assert that Turkey is making a profound shift toward the West at the expense of its balanced strategy. Present signals from the Kremlin suggest that Turkey's recent actions are noted but will not lead to a dramatic fracture in bilateral ties. However, gauging the repercussions of Turkey's ambition to mediate between Ukraine and Russia remains complex.

Despite possible cultural and religious identity differences, cooperation and collaboration is possible on pragmatic matters through emotional cognitive and psychological connections and similarities in worldview that are informed by values, norms and ideas. The concept of geo-socialization therefore has distinct connections to geopolitics.

Russia undoubtedly belongs to the European cultural space. At the same time, modern Europe, which has come to a civilizational crisis of values as a result of the imposition of the left-liberal model across the globe, cannot serve as a worthy guide. The preservation and restoration of values characteristic of genuine Europe is an important civilizational task.

The struggle for “traditional values” should mean not the protection of some specific list of “values,” but the protection of the mindset that distinguishes between science and politics, public and private, rational and emotional, male and female, truth and lies, etc. All these values, in fact, make up the principles of classical liberal conservatism, which the West has rejected, opting for a “culture war” and a new version of radical modernity.

The sooner we understand that the basis of “soft power” is internal, and not in the activities of Russia’s representatives abroad, the sooner we will be able to benefit from our own objective advantages.

The deepest lesson of Yugoslavia is that it foredoomed itself to defeat by the shift in its own thinking. That shift has also taken place in Russia. Avoidance of a Yugoslav outcome and a Serbian fate will require the reversal of that colossal self-defeating error in Serbian thinking.  

The ongoing debate over Russia’s place in world politics is a natural continuation of the historical, cultural, and philosophical experience of the late 19th century—the time when the country’s imperial statehood was in its prime but which also brought into light the problems that several decades later would lead to dramatic events in the last century.