Henry Kissinger, oče političnega realizma v mednarodnih odnosih v intervjuju za Der Spiegel pravi naslednje. Prvič, vojno v Ukrajini je treba končati, pogajalska pozicija pa bi morala biti situacija pred 24. februarjem. Drugič, o pomenu globalnega ravnotežja moči: ravnotežje moči samo po sebi ne zagotavlja stabilnosti, a brez ravnotežja moči ne morete imeti stabilnosti. In tretjič, razširiti vojno v Ukrajini v vojno proti Rusiji, hkrati pa ostati v izjemno sovražnem položaju do Kitajske, bi bilo to zelo nespametno. In četrtič, ko bo te vojne konec, bo vprašanje, ali bo Rusija dosegla skladen odnos z Evropo – kar si je vedno prizadevala – ali pa bo postala predstraža Azije na meji Evrope. Prihodnji odnos Rusije z Evropo bo postal ključno geostrateško vprašanje.
Moj pristavek: Vprašanje je, ali je v pogajanjih sploh še mogoče iti na pozicijo izpred 24. februarja (osebno močno dvomim v to). In vprašanje je, ali je v ameriških in evropskih voditeljih dovolj državništva, da bi se zavedali, da je nespametno voditi (tehnološko, trgovinsko, vojaško) vojno proti Rusiji in Kitajski hkrati in s tem hkrati proti novemu globalnemu gospodarskemu in političnemu polu (BRICS, OPEC). Drugače rečeno, vprašanje je, ali so ZDA in Evropa pripravljene miroljubno pristati na to, da so z globalizacijo, ki so jo same zagnale in dizajnirale, izgubile svojo dominantno vlogo v svetu. Ali so pripravljene pristati na multipolarni svet?
DER SPIEGEL: Mr. Kissinger, when you were born, Lenin was still alive. You were 29 years old when Stalin died, 39 when Nikita Khrushchev deployed nuclear missiles in Cuba and 45 when Leonid Brezhnev crushed the Prague Spring. Which of these Kremlin rulers does Vladmir Putin most remind you of?
Henry Kissinger: Khrushchev.
DER SPIEGEL: Why?
Kissinger: Khrushchev wanted recognition. He wanted to affirm the importance of his country and to be invited to America. The concept of equality was very important to him. In Putin’s case, this is even more acute, because he considers the collapse of the Russian position in Europe from 1989 onward as a strategic disaster for Russia. That has been his obsession. I don’t really share the view of many people who think that he wants to regain every bit of territory that was lost. But what he cannot bear is that the entire territory between Berlin and the Russian border fell to NATO. And that’s what made Ukraine such a key point for him.

You must be logged in to post a comment.