The Absurdity Trend in International Politics - On the Summit of the Russian and the U.S. Presidents

By AlexGorak, RTA Modern international politics raises anxiety and nervous expectation of the events preceding conflicts, demolitionand reconfiguration of traditional models and stereotypes. Accelerated and largely artificial globalization leads to a new wave of regionalization. The rules of the game and consistency in the actions are missing, the landmarks are lost. Adequacy, responsibility and balance ceased to be the norm. A new norm is populism and the desire to win votes and win over competitors at all costs. Foreign policy has always been an inevitable continuation of domestic policy, but included a certain, quite specific responsibility of world leaders for ensuring strategic stability and security, global prosperity (or, at least, the welfare and security of the notorious “golden billion”)as an integral component. Leading world politicians have always been considered through the prism of their heritage and influence on global and regional processes, and not through the ability to downgrade their opponents. Today, foreign policy being more than everunder the pressure of domestic policyreflects the internal political struggle. Wrestling which in recent years has become extremely fierce, unbridled and low-grade. This generates phantasmagorical stories in the spirit of recent statements by US President Donald Trump after the Helsinki summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin when, due to the candent US media and the grotesque claims of the American establishment, he was forced to recognize the reliability of intelligence data allegedly confirming Russian interference in the American elections. Giving awkwardand vague explanation, The US president told the media that he made a reservation. He said he saw no reason why Russia would be, but supposedly wanted to say that he did not see the reasons why it wouldn’t be Russia. Such explanations by the US President and forcingto address them to people who have been watching international politics for many years and not yet readjusted into the current populist regime, seems absurd. For quite some time, the meaning and content of the summit meetings, the agreements reached, have given way to the importance of the entourage of such meetings and their coverage in the media and, accordingly, public perception. The successful implementation of the information agenda, i.e., can make everything “upside down” turning the failure of negotiations into success and vice versa. However, the absurd results of the meeting between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump did not end here: some representatives of the Democratic Party in the US Congress tried to “call the interpreter of the US President on a carpet” in order to get information about the nature of the discussion between the two presidents. In fact, it was announced about the mistrust with regard to the presentation of the content and results of the meeting by Donald Tramp at the press conference. At the same time, the meeting itself turned into a political show though having been planned as a dialogue between world leaders bearing particular responsibility for the stability of international relations, for global peace and security, and having beenconsidered, at least, by the Russian side as the forerunner of a strategic dialogue on fence-mending the Russian-American relations. The American media, the intelligence using case of twelve Russian spy hackers and the arrest of a Russian Maria Butina have done everything possible and impossible to turn the dialogue of the two leaders into a stream of mutual accusations bringing the meeting ambience as close as possible to the farce. Attempts by the President of Russia and Russian diplomacy to maintain a sober traditional approach, as well as high-quality mediation efforts of the President of Finland, SauliNiinistö, could not save the summit from absurd echoes and attempts to manipulate and devalue its results. When a balanced working dialogue is impossible, and channels for solving the key issues of war and peace are shutting down, the situation on the international scene triggersunbiased concern. Public policy, including the international relations, increasingly acquires the features of an uncontrolled nonsense giving room for anything but the feelings of measure and responsibility. Meanwhile, responsibility is a vital need. But many people have begun to forget about this fact. For example, the United States of America has the most advanced and perfect army on the planet Earth with lethal weapons systems allowing to destroy countries in a few hours. The United States manages the most powerful intelligence and diplomatic services allowing solving any, including military tasks worldwide– to support protests, sponsor political parties and eliminate governments. Thus, there is a toolkit for lightning-out imbalance of the situation where it is required. At the same time, the issue of using the mentioned tools remains the prerogative of leaders who have lost a sense of strategic responsibility for global peace and the adequate evolution of the international situation staying under constant pressure of political opponents (or establishment), the media and civil society. In this situation, various negative manifestations can not be ruled out, including fatal errors that would pose a threat to peace and security, as well as to the lives of people. To date, a convention on a conflict-free hostel of countries and peoples looks quite impossible, since a new regionalization leads to attempts by each state to milk and bargain the most favourable conditions for them. The previously mentioned Donald Trump is a classic example of such a leader-businessman striving to protect exclusively the interests of his/her state-company. Shaky ornate internal political situation in most states, especially in the US, leads to the fact that foreign policy is the only way to show determination, courage and other leadership qualities. It reduces the potential of cooperation and returns a “zero-sum game” into a trend state. Since the current circumstances make the agreement on peace and the fair distribution of resources practically unattainable, it becomes obvious that it is necessary to start work on analysing and rethinking the events taking place, formulating new, adequate situations and approaches in the interests of global peace and security.