Remarks by Ambassador Vladimir CHIZHOV,
Permanent Representative of the Russian
Federation to the EU, at the Alpbach Political
Symposium
Alpbach, Austria, August 30, 2010
GEOPOLITICAL PARADIGM SHIFTS
I would like to pay a well-deserved compliment to the organizers of this conference for
having selected a very interesting subject for our panel discussion. Indeed, we live in a period of
not simple changes, but rather fundamental shifts. Reality shows that half-hearted changes in
existing approaches and cosmetic renovation of mechanisms created decades ago do not suffice
for our adaptation to current global «tectonic movements». We need something more - a real
shift of the geopolitical paradigm.
In the last 20 years the very notion of geopolitics has changed. The traditional 20th
century view that it is primarily geography which determines foreign policy, interests and
capabilities of any state, seems obsolete. Today there are many more factors defining the place
and role of states in the modern world and their foreign policy approaches: degree of economic
and technological development, availability of sufficient human resources and level of their
education and other qualification, effectiveness of public administration and degree of public
confidence in it, level of energy and food security, availability of natural resources, including not
only, for example oil, but drinking water as well, ability to prevent and to deal with the
consequences of natural and man-made disasters, willingness and capability to agree with
partners, to build internally and externally attractive social and economic models, ensuring
dignified quality of life for its population.
There are now a lot more international actors as well. The number of countries willing to
make an active (or even proactive) contribution to global affairs, to undertake initiatives on their
own is growing. The mediatory efforts by-Brazil and Turkey to help resolve the situation with
regard to the Iranian nuclear programme is a manifest example.
But this medal has a back side too. It is not an exaggeration to say that, with growing
interdependence, developments in every region of the world can easily gain a global scale.
Formerly local crises, even if they attracted attention, did so usually as a kind of simulation
games of inter-bloc confrontation. Now there are no more blank spots on the world geopolitical
map. What kind of threat for the international community could have come in the past, for
example from the internal situation in Somalia? Nowadays, Russia, the EU, some other states are
joining efforts in combating piracy along the coast of that country. Migration flows, which are by
no means dropping, are having a growing impact on daily lives of our citizens. Their causes are
well known. Apart from social and economic conditions, they include internal political
situations, ethnic and religious conflicts. Organized crime and terrorist networks disregard
national borders and are able to find places with most favourable conditions for themselves on
the world map. To complete the whole picture let me mention growing competition for access to
natural resources, in particular energy, and tensions in inter-civilization relations intensified by
proponents of ideological approaches to international affairs.
Such is the unconsoling and even somewhat disquieting «diagnosis» of the current state
of play. What could be the «therapy»? Everything indicates that the most important thing now is
to look for collective rather than unilateral responses to the challenges and threats all countries
face.
Of course, the attempt to find out to what extent the global multipolar world of today is a
self-organizing structure capable of self-perfection, may look attractive from the standpoint of
political science. But until now we have had to pay quite dear for such a «scientific experience».
In the course of the last two years we all had the opportunity to see how non-preparedness for
timely reform of the global governance system affected the economy. In order to agree to
establish the G20 the leading world economies had to experience in full measure partial loss of
control over the financial and economic sphere. I do hope this sort of situation would not be
repeated in the security sphere, as the consequences of a serious regional or even global crisis
there can be much graver.
Let alone other regions - even here, in the Euro-Atlantic area politico-military realities
are visibly lagging far behind current economic, technological, trade, investment and other
processes of interdependence and getting increasingly inconsistent with the imperatives of our
time. Unfortunately, the tragic events of neither September 2001, nor of August 2008 have
moved the Euro-Atlantic region towards an unequivocal choice in favour of equality and
collective actions in the sphere of politico-military security.
European security has become shaky in all its aspects over the previous twenty years.
This applies to the arms control regime and to the obvious loss of influence by traditional
politico-military alliances, which are in convulsive search for new functions and applications.
This also applies to remaining conflict potential.
No one should try to secure oneself at others' expense - this cornerstone principle has
been endorsed in both the OSCE and the Russia-NATO Council, but is not actually being
observed. Moreover, there are those who are still comfortable with confrontational politics and
who would like to make the destiny of Europe hostage of its past and inherited phobias, to revive
tensions and stake on military strength. Alas, readiness to renounce bloc mentality often remains
an empty declaration.
The only right solution in this situation appears to be strengthening of norms and
mechanisms of international law and ensuring that all participants of international relations
without exception observe them strictly and undeviatingly.
This thesis is not new, of course. However, its practical implementation is clearly
proceeding at an inadequate pace. It appears that the development and conclusion of
fundamentally new treaties in this sphere is long overdue.
It does not in any way mean that we are talking about a radical break-up of the
established Euro-Atlantic security system. But we all need uniform and identically interpreted
rules of the game on the international arena. This is what international law is all about. How can
this goal be achieved? For a start we suggest a simple, minimally necessary effort: to impart to
the basic principle of indivisible security that was earlier accepted as a political commitment, a
legally binding character. Herein lies the essence of the initiative launched by Russian President
Dmitry Medvedev for a European Security Treaty. This Treaty would not cancel any of the
previous pan-European instruments, nor would it ignore any of the existing organizations. It is
not about a new - from an institutional view - architecture of European security, but rather about
bringing the present one to a common legal denominator on the basis of collectively promulgated
principles. We believe that the idea of a European Security Treaty provides a comprehensive
answer to all security deficits in the region. So far, no one has attempted to convince us of the
opposite. Quite the contrary, those who have not lost the ability to think unbiasedly and in broad
categories, are coming to the same conclusions.
Whether we like it or not, progressive multipolarity of the world that renders impossible a
uni - or bipolar governance in global affairs is an objective reality. It is a kind of «matrix» for the
era of globalisation, which requires developing adequate geopolitics.
One way or another, today in the face of security challenges of a new generation, all
countries are «in the same boat» and objectively interested in each other's success. It is no longer
possible to govern in global affairs on the basis of blocs or traditional axes: the modem world is
not only complex, but it is also variable. The degree of interdependence of states is so high that
agreements reached in restricted circles behind closed doors lose any meaning. In a world where
each country can at any given moment find itself in a vulnerable situation, in need of solidarity
and support, everybody should strive for agreement with others.
Networking diplomacy has no alternative. The international community is a living, selfsufficient organism where any puppetry is counter-productive. If something is required, it is
equality and democracy providing for reasoned debate and search of consensus. The sooner this
understanding gains foothold in practice, the better. Permanent dialogue, taking into account
opinions of others, forming open-ended «coalitions of the willing» - this is the way Russia
pursues its policy in international affairs. We do more than just consistently develop integration
ties in the CIS area and strengthen our relations with the EU and its member states. We invest
considerable efforts into the «reset» of relations with the US. We actively promote further
development of trilateral cooperation between Russia, the EU and the US on an increasingly
wide range of issues. The promising format of BRIC is being gradually institutionalized. The
Shanghai Cooperation Organization is becoming an increasingly important platform of regional
cooperation with participation of Russia and China.
By the way, simultaneous strengthening of a number of regional cooperation mechanisms
with Russian membership serves also as a safety net, a guarantee against ultimate fragmentation
when every state would stand only for itself and, consequently, sometimes against others. This
explains, inter alia, Russia's choice in favour of the establishment of a Customs Union with
Kazakhstan and Belarus as one more step towards further development of the Eurasian
Economic Community. In a month Russia will be joining ASEM, a forum bringing together
countries of Europe and Asia. Russia is coming back to Latin America and Africa. We are
steadily enhancing cooperation with the Muslim world, including the OIC. In short, Russia
confirms in practice its choice in favour of multilateralism. At the heart of our foreign policy lie
the philosophy of co-operative behaviour and the conviction that demand for confrontational
approaches passes irretrievably.
It is clear that every state bears its own part of responsibility for global affairs. We are
ready to share the common burden. This is the reason for Russia's active position in search of
effective mechanisms of global governance.
In conclusion I would like to stress that as a global power Russia does not and simply
cannot have any interests inconsistent with the interests of the international community. We are
ready to work together to ensure fair and democratic world order, which guarantees security and
prosperity for all and not just for the selected few.