D| APPENDIX: IMPERIALISTIC BEHAVIOR OF AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY

FURTHER DISCUSSION

I am posting the following comment in reply to several inquiries that I received about my assertion that, “the current U.S. foreign policy toward Ukraine and Russia has been rather inflexible and dismissive.” Such policy is not a characteristic expression of the idiosyncrasy of the power of the United States.

The issue of "dismissive"

The indicated policy is dismissive because it ignored potential implications. The implications that I am referring to, are: 

• The potentially lengthy involvement of the U.S. in a dispute with Russia. 
  
  
• The direct encounter of the U.S. against Russia.

• The risk of a nuclear exchange with Russia that may escalate into a global nuclear war.
  
  
• It is hard to anticipate reactions of a newly formed global polyarchy, as new countries are elevated and they are positioning to become global antagonists to the U.S. For instance, the ensuing partnering relationship between Russia and China.  
  
  
• The adverse effects that may be produced in political bilateral relations with second-tier countries. For instance, the recent political tensions between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, which have helped elevate the global status of China in the Middle East.

 The issue of "inflexible" 

 The indicated policy is inflexible because it ignored rudimentary principles in negotiations. The noted inflexibility:  

• Is illustrated by the ostensible refusal of the U.S. to understand and embrace the fears of Russia with regards to Ukraine’s NATO membership.  This refusal denoted U.S.’s absolutist thinking over the sovereignty of a country.

• Discounted the fear of Russia that eventually it might be permeated by the U.S. social culture and its relevant cultural values.
  
  
• Did not allow the prognostication of the eventual democratization of Russia and its likely integration into the socio-economic culture of a greater Europe.
  
  
• Promoted a non-globalist policy by preventing Russia's integration into Europe through democratization. (We must not forget that since the fall of the Soviet Union, in 1991, democratization has been the universally prevailing trend.)
  
  

Question:  Is conflict preferable to slow, peaceful democratization?

Author: CGP .+.