I do not agree with everything that he says, but there is one thing that I definitely agree with, and think that more Americans really need to hear, and work to understand. I have mentioned it - repeatedly - on this blog page, that the main problem that I see with the United States today, and far and away at that, is the widespread belief in American exceptionalism. That is to say, the sentiment that Americans are superior, are special, and as the most powerful nation in the world (at least presently), can do whatever the hell they want, wherever and whenever the hell they want.
Here is what Putin has to say, as he calls out President Obama in telling Americans, encouraging Americans really, to view their nation as the world's exception:
"I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.
That notion of being exceptional, and the continued practice of patting themselves on the back, is what separates the United States from the rest of the world, and it is not a positive. At best, it is a false positive, a seeming joining together in sentiment and spirit of the nation, but one that presumes a measure of superiority and, thus, a measure of separation, from anyone and everyone who is not American, and no, that is not a positive. I have always wondered how Americans remain oblivious to this. When you claim to be better than everyone else (and let's face it, that is what a lot of Americans believe, demonstrably, with their words and their actions), it is not only arrogant, it is downright dangerous. And Americans have begun to pay a steep price as a result. Putin points this out, citing America is getting involved in more conflicts throughout the world:
"It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”
Alright. I have mentioned the things that I agree with on Putin. As for the use of chemical weapons - well, I just am not sure about that. It is hard to believe that it was not the Syrian government, but I am not sure. Also, I am not convinced, frankly, that Putin is the best man for Russia presently.
That said, he is the President of Russia, and this is addressed to the United States. So, without further ado, here is what he has to say to Americans:
A Plea for Caution From Russia
What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria
By VLADIMIR V. PUTIN
Published: September 11, 2013
MOSCOW — RECENT events surrounding Syria have prompted me to
speak directly to the American people and their political leaders. It is
important to do so at a time of insufficient communication between our
societies.
Relations between us have passed through different stages.
We stood against each other during the cold war. But we were also allies once,
and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organization — the
United Nations — was then established to prevent such devastation from ever
happening again.
The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions
affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America’s
consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the
United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the
stability of international relations for decades.
No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the
League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is
possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military
action without Security Council authorization.
The potential strike by the United States against Syria,
despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious
leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and
escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria’s borders. A
strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could
undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North
Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of
balance.
Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed
conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There
are few champions of democracy inSyria. But there are more
than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the
government. The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front
and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as
terrorist organizations. This internal conflict, fueled by foreign weapons
supplied to the opposition, is one of the bloodiest in the world.
Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds
of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep
concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in
Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This
threatens us all.
From the outset, Russia has
advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for
their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but
international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and
believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is
one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos.
The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not.
Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by
the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the
United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.
No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there
is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by
opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons,
who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are
preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.
It is alarming that military intervention in internal
conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is
it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world
increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on
brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with
us or against us.”
But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan
is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces
withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war
continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an
analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to
repeat recent mistakes.
No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the
weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and
children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.
The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on
international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus
a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This
is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk
of the need to strengthen nonproliferation, when in reality this is being
eroded.
We must stop using the language of force and return to the
path of civilized diplomatic and political settlement.
A new opportunity to avoid military action has emerged in
the past few days. The United States, Russia and all members of the
international community must take advantage of the Syrian government’s
willingness to place its chemical arsenal under international control for
subsequent destruction. Judging by the statements of President Obama, the United States
sees this as an alternative to military action.
I welcome the president’s interest in continuing the
dialogue with Russia on Syria. We must work together to keep this hope alive,
as we agreed to at the Group of 8 meeting in Lough Erne in Northern Ireland in
June, and steer the discussion back toward negotiations.
If we can avoid force against Syria, this will improve the
atmosphere in international affairs and strengthen mutual trust. It will be our
shared success and open the door to cooperation on other critical issues.
My working and personal relationship with President Obama is
marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to
the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on
American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes
America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous
to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.
There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long
democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their
policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s
blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.
Vladimir V. Putin is the president of Russia.
No comments:
Post a Comment