Assessments of the International Situation in the World in the Interpretation and Interests of the Kremlin

Yurii Mykhailenko

With the escalation of the confrontation between Russia and the West over Ukraine, as well as a number of other contradictions between the parties, Moscow is trying to strengthen its position by intensifying its participation in resolving global problems. At this, due to the Western sanctions and the inability of Russian leadership to achieve such goals in cooperation with Western countries and international organizations, Moscow organizes various alternative actions to discuss these issues with Russian politicians and experts, as well as Russia’s supporters.

As a rule, such actions are purely propagandistic and aimed at forming a positive image of Russia, as well as discrediting the United States, NATO, the EU and Ukraine and other Russia’s adversaries. An example of this is the activities of the Valdai Discussion Club, which was established in 2004 under the de facto auspices of the RF’s Presidential Administration. Today the Valdai Club is managed by the Valdai Foundation, which is formally an independent and non-profit organization. At the same time, the founders of the Foundation are semi-state and state organizations, including: the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, the Russian International Affairs Council, the Moscow State Institute of International Relations of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the National Research University “Higher School of Economics”.

October 18–21, 2021 the 18^th annual meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club took place in Sochi. It was themed “Global Shake-Up in the 21^st Century: The Individual, Values, and the State”. The Forum was attended by Russian President Vladimir Putin, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, as well as Russian and some foreign politicians and experts. More than 15 sessions took place during the meeting, some of which were closed to the media and the general public. The agenda included a number of issues that are of particular relevance to Russia and the world in today’s situation, namely:

• the psychological state of the world community in the era of COVID-19;
• achieving an optimal balance between freedoms and restrictions on human rights, as well as the limits of state control in modern conditions;
• Russian policy and international efforts to fight climate change;
• international struggle for technological superiority;
• Russia and the ideological transformation of the world;
• Russian experience of overcoming crises.

The main aspects of these issues were revealed in the introductory Valdai Club Report “The Age of Pandemic: Year Two. The Future Is Back”, as well as in the speeches of the participants. The assessments provided were both objective and subjective. On the one hand, the reason for this situation was the pro-Russian orientation of the Valdai Club, and on the other — the obvious changes in the world, which can no longer be ignored, even if they are contrary to the interests of the Kremlin.

The latter circumstances are the most significant in the work of the Valdai Club and other similar forums in Russia. Of course, pro-Kremlin politicians, experts and propagandists are trying to hide this state of affairs, but their efforts have been almost unsuccessful.

Valdai Club Report “The Age of Pandemic: Year Two. The Future Is Back”

For example, among the objective assessments made during the meeting of the Valdai Club one can point out the recognition (declaration) of the following facts:

• the COVID-19 pandemic was the first non-major global phenomenon in history to bring about radical change in the world, and has challenged virtually every country in the world, along with testing the resilience of their political and economic systems, defense components and all other state institutions;
• the consequences of the pandemic showed the erroneous ideas of the world community in the late 20^th– early 21^st centuries about the actual achievement of human development goals in the political, socio-economic and scientific-technical spheres, which required only a final solution to some unresolved issues and further progress in the chosen spheres;
• the pandemic not only undermined the process of globalization of the world, but also brought it back, which previously seemed impossible. Thus, most of the countries (despite national, religious and other differences between them) instead of integrating within a single trade and economic system, began to create mutual barriers to combat the spread of the COVID-19;
• the isolation which replaced globalization led to growing contradictions between different countries, created obstacles to trade and economic cooperation between them, and limited the movement of people, goods, services and money, which led to a slowdown in the world economy;
• in a number of cases, the actions of governments to support their economic systems in the pandemic only caused additional problems. First of all, this concerns the implementation of large-scale anti-crisis programs by the world’s leading economies and their implementation of measures to protect national markets by raising tariffs on imports of goods, which resulted in a global surge in inflation and, consequently, falling living standards;
• the problems associated with the pandemic were shocking, but it did not have catastrophic consequences for the world. The economy, society and government agencies quickly adapted to the new conditions. Moreover, the leadership of a number of countries is using the COVID-19 pandemic to strengthen its power by suppressing opposition protests under the guise of quarantine measures. At the same time, the pandemic was a good opportunity for EU countries to block the influx of refugees and migrants from conflict zones in the Middle East and North Africa;
• the longer the pandemic lasts, the harder it is to return to previous realities, which were determined by the deepening of globalization, simplification of international trade and expansion of human rights and freedoms. This is due to the aforementioned interests of the leaders of many countries, including leading democracies such as the United States and EU members;
• against the background of these consequences of the pandemic on the spheres of economy and development of the processes of world globalization, its influence on the relations between different countries had rather limited scales. In particular, the contradictions between different countries have remained, none of the conflicts has been resolved, and the actual lack of real results of the work of international institutions (UN and OSCE) has confirmed their deep crisis;
• in contrast to the de facto stability of relations between the world’s leading and other countries, the pandemic forced them to adjust their domestic policies, namely to focus on overcoming the negative effects of COVID-19 on the population and national economies;
• the ambiguity of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic also applies to the spread of digital and telecommunications technologies around the world. On the one hand, the transition of a significant number of people to remote working methods has become a powerful stimulus for the development of this sphere, and on the other — it has created much greater opportunities for some countries to interfere in internal affairs of others (including influencing elections, and undermining the normal operation of computer systems of political, economic, transport and military facilities). Besides, the growing role and importance of digital and communication technologies allows public authorities and powerful corporations to control the work of various business segments and personal lives of individuals. Similar methods are actively used at the private level as well;
• the pandemic’s stretching in time causes exacerbation of social tensions in the society in Russia and other countries. Thus, working remotely has led to significant stress in people, resulting in increased workload and length of the working day (until the complete disappearance of the difference between work and leisure), as well as blurring the line between private and public. People who lost their jobs or were threatened with dismissal were even more stressed. In view of this, attempts by citizens to “escape” from reality by immersing themselves in the virtual — computer world (social networks and games) or alcohol and drugs have become widespread. At the same time, more and more people protest against quarantine measures, limitation of their rights due to the pandemic and vaccination;
• the danger of the consequences of the pandemic gave medical officials fundamentally new powers in the fight against it. This situation has turned them into a new “biopower”, which largely determines the parameters of the society (quarantine, work permits, restrictions, vaccinations). In a number of cases, this acquires the character of “medical terrorism”, which is perceived as a threat to human rights and freedoms;
• the practice of individual countries and entrepreneurs (oligarchs)’ using the pandemic for their foreign policy and economic purposes is becoming widespread. In particular, this applies to their special information campaigns to exaggerate the effects of the pandemic in the interests of putting pressure on other states and undermining their international positions, as well as promoting their own products, especially vaccines, tests, medicines and medical equipment;
• the COVID-19 pandemic will have a long-term character, as shown by its next waves with new and more aggressive and dangerous virus mutations. The consequence of this is the continuing process of disintegration of the world trade and economic system, which arose in recent years as a result of its globalization. Under such circumstances, the economic self-sufficiency of countries and their ability to function with a high degree of isolation are of paramount importance. In turn, this requires that they have adequate resources to support the economy, maintain a decent standard of living and counter the pandemic and other problems. At this, such reserves should be balanced on the volumes, proceeding from necessary needs;
• the pandemic once again confirmed the inseparable symbiosis of humanity and nature, which increased the urgency of the problem of global climate change. Especially, given the obvious threats to their manifestations for our entire civilization. This problem has caused an urgent need to move from traditional energy based on hydrocarbon combustion to “clean” (“green”) energy. In this regard, there is a priority development of solar, wind, hydro and other types of energy systems based on renewable energy sources. The world’s leading countries are returning to the wider use of nuclear power plants, which are unsafe to operate (in terms of possible consequences of accidents involving the release of radioactive substances), but cause much less damage to the environment if they operate normally than if hydrocarbons are used;
• given the growing importance of environmentally friendly energy, in the near future it will determine the international rankings of countries that are currently formed on the basis of their economies and financial systems. And, therefore, it is the degree of development of “clean” energy that will determine the competitiveness of countries in terms of access to investment and promotion of their products on world markets. At this, this will create new sources of contradictions and conflicts between them. Besides, resistance to the spread of new types of energy by powerful multinational corporations involved in the production, transportation and use of traditional hydrocarbon fuels is expected to increase;
• the effects of the pandemic and global climate change analyzed above are an additional factor in the confrontation between the leading centers of power, primarily the United States and China and Russia. The main content of this confrontation is the struggle for access to resources (in the broadest sense), which provide an opportunity for independent survival and resistance to external influences. This is another driving force in the formation of a new order in the world, which replaces the political system that emerged after the end of the Cold War, and is characterized by the transition from globalization to individualism;
• the tendency to change the world order is also the reason for the persistence and increase in the number of conflicts between different countries, due to both the increased competition between them, struggle for resources, and the desire to ensure their security and sovereignty. Besides, it reduces the resilience of existing alliances and coalitions of countries, including those led by the United States, China and Russia. Evidence of this is: the growing differences between the USA and Europe and within the EU; division of the post-Soviet space into several groups of countries with different external goals, including those contrary to Russia’s interests (together with the preservation of problems within the CSTO and the Eurasian Economic Union); growing difficulties in China’s implementation of its Belt and Road strategic initiative due to the project participants’ concerns about their growing dependence on China;
• the possibility of interstate conflicts’ turning into large-scale wars is still constrained by nuclear weapons and the habit of a comfortable and safe existence. In view of this, a multi-polar system of international relations is being formed without world wars and the emergence of dominant poles, which could achieve their superiority over others through the use of force;
• this trend leads to a decrease in the role of the military potential of countries in achieving their geopolitical goals, which also applies to nuclear weapons. In fact, nuclear weapons are no longer a means of waging war, but only a deterrent. However, as noted above, this does not mean the cessation of the struggle between the various countries, which only takes a new form, namely, the use of sanctions and trade and economic wars aimed at weakening the adversary. Under such circumstances, the advantage still remains with the West, which has accumulated more resources, but can no longer secure its dominance in the world;
• the strengthening of individualism between countries and deepening of differences between them (including between Russia and China, which declare a strategic partnership), essentially precludes the possibility of dividing the world into several blocs, as was the case during the Cold War. This is another factor in reducing the role and importance of leading international institutions, which now not only do not promote the interests of leading centers of power, but cannot protect less powerful countries either;
• the first attempt to build a stable and relatively just world order without a major war, which was made after the collapse of the USSR, actually failed. The pandemic gave a chance for a second attempt, albeit in quite extreme conditions. Each country can take part in this process, show itself and take its rightful place in the new world.

In general, these assessments outlined the picture of the crisis in the world, which created the preconditions for another change in the entire system of international relations.

In the speeches of the participants of the Valdai Club meetings, there were a number of subjective approaches to the analysis of the situation in the world, which mainly reflected the contradictions between Russia and its Western opponents. In particular, the following statements can be considered quite biased:

• many Euro-Atlantic countries began to abandon their Christian roots as the foundations of Western civilization. Moral principles and national identity, including culture, family values and even respect for human rights, are thrusted aside;
• liberal principles of the Western society and economy fail because they give too much freedom to individuals and put their personal rights above the common interest of the public, and a market economy leads to the stratification of people into rich and poor, which leads to confrontation between them and does not allow to avoid economic crises and ensure their rapid overcoming;
• in international politics, western liberalism is a de facto cover for the imperialist policy of the United States, which it pursues in the world under the guise of promoting the ideas of democracy and the need to respect human rights. At the same time, the United States is trying to interfere in internal affairs of other countries, Russia included;
• the hegemonic ambitions of the West were embodied in the creation of a Europe without Russia, which was based on the enlargement of NATO and the EU. Western liberalism later became the hegemonic norm and severed the link between legitimacy and law when NATO launched an illegal “humanitarian intervention” that changed Serbia’s borders;
• the USA’s illegal invasion of Iraq, backed by the so-called “alliance of democracies” as an alternative to the United Nations, marked the beginning of the leveling of the United Nations as an effective international organization. This is the reason for the UN’s inability to resolve today’s conflicts and other international problems;
• instead of adhering to the principles of international law under the auspices of the United Nations, the United States is trying to build a new world order that divides the world into “democracies” and “authoritarian states”. By this, the United States justifies its actions to use military force against other countries whose policies are not in line with American interests, as well as attempts to change their power through “color” revolutions. At this, the right to self-determination of Crimean residents is completely ignored;
• in previous historical periods, the decline of some countries or territories usually led to their capture by stronger states, which actually took responsibility for them. Now this is almost impossible — at best, neighbors take measures to minimize the threats from troublesome neighbors. Classical expansionism is out of fashion. In fact, such an assessment is completely contrary to Moscow’s policy of active external expansion and the seizure of the territories of the neighboring countries of the former USSR.

Despite the Russian politicians and experts’ understanding of the objective processes taking place in the world, in reality, Russia’s policy is based on erroneous assessments of the international situation, which are more in line with the mentality and interests of the Kremlin. At this, such assessments (including those presented during the Valdai Club meeting) are aimed at covering up the negative aspects of Moscow’s course and justifying its goals, which include:

• the Kremlin’s active policy of bringing Russia to the level of a “great world power”. The main forms of such a policy are: imposing various integration initiatives on the countries of the former USSR (including those that contradict their interests); restoring the sphere of influence of the former USSR (including in the Central and Eastern Europe, the Baltic states and some countries in the Middle East, Africa, Central and South America and the Asia-Pacific region); expansion in Europe;
• continuation of the armed aggression against Ukraine with the aim of its disintegration as a single integral state, prevention of our country’s accession to NATO and the EU and establishment of Russian control over it. At this, Moscow justifies the annexation of Crimea by the “right of the population of the peninsula to self-determination” and the conflict in the Donbas — by the “civil war” or “internal crisis” in Ukraine, with which Russia has nothing to do. In addition, Russia categorically denies Ukraine’s right to its own external choice;
• Russia’s purposeful escalation of the confrontation with the West with demonstrations of military force aimed at urging the United States and Europe to redistribute the world as was the case after World War II. At the same time, confrontation with the West is being used by the Russian leadership in the interests of uniting the Russian population around it on the basis of creating an image of Russia as a “besieged fortress”. Moscow is also trying to restore positive relations with the West as a condition for lifting sanctions from Russia. At this, the fundamental differences of the above-mentioned goals are in no way taken into account by the Kremlin;
• preservation of the totalitarian regime in Russia (as an alternative to Western liberalism and democracy), accompanied by human rights violations, media harassment and suppression of the opposition. Moreover, Moscow pursues a policy of assimilation of the peoples living on its territory, and the manifestations of their national consciousness are regarded exclusively as nationalism and extremism. Along with this, the policy of racism is actually pursued in terms of the formation of hatred towards the Ukrainian people and Western society;
• the actual return to Soviet methods of control over the leading branches of the Russian economy in a new form of state-oligarchic capitalism;
• Russia’s use of the United Nations and other international organizations (including the OSCE and the Council of Europe) to achieve its goals, including in the confrontation with the West and Ukraine.

However, Russia is forced to react to real changes in the world, although, as always, it tries to use them for its own purposes. This was actually confirmed in the speech of Russian President V. Putin at the plenary session of the Valdai Club on October 21, 2021. According to him:

• the crisis taking place in the world has a conceptual and civilizational character. This requires a serious rethinking and change of the modern system of international relations and the world order;
• (Russia) should fight for the truth with all its might (he means Russia’s intentions to continue the struggle against the West to achieve its geopolitical goals). More than three decades ago, the search for a new world order began. However, it has not yet been found, and those who consider themselves winners in the Cold War are increasingly losing ground;
• a global transformation of the world is taking place currently, which includes not only a change in the balance of power or a scientific and technological breakthrough. First of all, this applies to global climate change and pandemics, as a result of which the strategic confrontation between different countries is pointless. In addition, the socio-economic problems of the mankind (including the food crisis) have escalated to the level of global shock, which requires joint efforts of all leading countries in the world to resolve these problems;
• the existing model of capitalism has exhausted itself. Uneven distribution of material goods leads to a deepening of inequalities and causes an increase in divisions both in Western societies and between rich and poor countries. The consequences are the growing extremism and the spread of uncontrolled migration;
• an additional reason for the complication of the situation in many countries is the hypertrophied reaction of their societies to measures to fight the coronavirus. Instead of uniting people, the pandemic has become a divisive factor. Russia has repeatedly called to abandon inappropriate ambitions and work with the West to counter the pandemic. However, this did not find a proper response. Instead, the selfish interests of Western countries prevailed;
• institutions of world governance have lost their effectiveness. This problem can be addressed by giving greater rights at the UN to developing countries that need more assistance;
• the West’s dominance, which began a few centuries ago, is changing by a much more multifaceted, multi-polar system. In fact, the USA’s attempts to prevent this have failed, which is the cause of the current crisis;
• the United States, as the most powerful country in the world, lost the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, as a result, the situation has only worsened. While earlier, the defeated country took responsibility for the consequences of the war, the United States transferred it to other countries;
• only sovereign countries can effectively counter today’s challenges and threats. Any effective international order must take into account the interests of all countries, and not try to prove that they should not exist;
• the scale of change taking place in the world requires special care. In this respect, revolutions only aggravate the situation, and are not a way out of the crisis. Besides, in today’s world, the importance of strong pillar based on moral and ethical principles, giving up racism and discrimination against people is growing. Given this situation, Russia chooses the path of moderate conservatism. This is what Moscow calls the main ways out of the crisis, based on its experience.

As in many of his other speeches, V. Putin raised the issue of Ukraine in a negative sense for Russia. In particular, he accused the Ukrainian leadership of persecuting the opposition, which allegedly did not allow the Ukrainian people to legitimately form the authorities that would have met its interests. At this, the current leadership of Ukraine was again called by V. Putin “a small group of people who have appropriated the laurels of winners in the struggle for independence and have extreme political views”. At the same time, he stressed the danger for Russia of Ukraine’s rapprochement with NATO “which has no formal membership in the Alliance, but NATO is already actively using Ukrainian territory”. He did not fail to mention the gas transportation system of Ukraine, emphasizing that “it is just old, from Soviet times. Environmentalists had to say: “Close transit through Ukraine immediately!”.

In general, the results of the annual meeting of the Valdai Club allow us to draw the following conclusions.

A correct understanding of today’s realities is becoming more widespread in the Russian expert community. Despite the hypertrophied nature of Russia’s information-analytical sphere, which mainly serves the Kremlin’s interests, it is no longer able to ignore the changes taking place in the world.

Such realities are not accepted by the leadership of the Russian Federation, which continues to pursue a policy based on the principles of aggressive expansion, as well as strengthening the authoritarianism of its power. This is also objective in nature and is linked to the mentality and position of the Putin regime. On the one hand, Putin cannot deviate from the old Soviet, but, in fact, Russian-imperial thinking, and on the other, he understands that changes in the Kremlin’s policy will not only mean the collapse of its ideology, but will pose a direct threat to his power and security. In addition, the essence of Russia as the last empire of the classical type in the world, does not allow democratic change in the country and abandoning external expansion, because it would mean its collapse.

As part of this policy, Russia’s main efforts are to confront the United States, NATO and the EU, which it sees as major obstacles to achieving its neo-imperial goals, as well as Ukraine, which Russia considers its “lost territory” and anti-Russian Western project. All this once again confirms the impossibility of reaching any positive agreements between Ukraine and Russia, including on resolving the problems around Crimea and the Donbas. The same applies to relations between Moscow and the West.

Over time, Russia’s aggressive course is becoming more open and no longer disguised by it, as shown by Putin’s speech at the Valdai Club. This trend increases the level of threats to Ukraine, which requires it to further strengthen its defense potential and the entire security sphere (including the reliable energy security of our state).