'It is easier to fight
for one's principles than to live up to them.' Alfred Adler
Inspiration, I recently learned, can be
sought from people. Submerged in life’s demands and race with time, I failed to
be inspired to re-take up my blog and share my notions, which have sometimes
resonated with a few former followers (who probably and rightfully deserted the
blog). However, and following a thought-provoking conversation with a work
colleague who shared valuable and genuine insights on life experiences, I was
prompted to ponder deeper into one particular observation and link it to
present day political developments.
The discerning comment raised by that
colleague (to whom I am grateful) during a lustrous lunch
conversation was one related to the ease of shifting the minds and hearts of a
nation that learned to believe, in all its passions, that ideology dictates
every aspect of one’s life. He recalled from his childhood that the iniquitous capitalist system that has been long
scorned during Communist regimes was suddenly hailed as the liberating force
which freed nations from economic and intellectual enslavement. The powerful American
doctrine with its liberal and neoliberal slogans influenced the minds of
millions in a year that might just as well serve as historical breaking point.
History seems to repeat itself in that
sense, where a game of influence vs. power is shifting realities in the troubled
Middle East. A deal that is being brokered between the USA and Russia to set up
a joint implementing group, which would facilitate the exchange of intelligence
and coordinate airstrikes against the Islamic State and the Nusra Front in
Syria, is a hubristic indication of the approaching winds of change. Suddenly,
Russia has become a solution rather than a problem to the Syrian crisis, and soon enough,
Al Assad regime will follow suit. The rhetoric regarding the butcheries orchestrated
by the regime will gradually become “wrist slaps”, and the devilish features of
the regime will be elegantly clad in a victimised “I had no other option”
angelic robe.
The slow but steady approach followed by
the Russians in their policy towards Syria must be commended. Giving Americans
what they want (power), while maintaining what really matters (influence)
stands testimony to the veteran ingeniousness behind Russia’s foreign policy.
Mokken and Stokman (1989:46 cit. by Kim,
2013:9) explained that “power is the capacity of actors to fix or to change a
set of actions or choice alternatives for other actors, and influence is the
capacity of actors to determine partly the actions or choices of other actors
within the set of actions, or choice alternatives available to those actors”. Meanwhile, Zimmerling (2005: 141,cit. by Kim,
2013:9) defined power as “the ability to
get desired outcomes by making others do what one wants, and influence as the
ability to affect others’ beliefs, that is, their opinions about what ought be
the case or what is right or wrong/desirable or undesirable.
What seems to be the case at the moment
is that Russia is feeding America’s insatiable hunger for power – something it
is doing by influencing the US foreign policy. Perhaps the US is in a position
to enforce what it wants to enforce in Syria and carry out as many attacks as
it wishes. However, this power is limited to what Russia is offering: limited
options and limited targets under the umbrella of cooperation. Furthermore,
Russian influence is extending beyond the traditional allies and expanding to
other realms: what might have sounded as outrageous in the past (Assad regime
intact), does not necessarily sound that outrageous any more. The belief system of many
regimes and their nations is under the influence of the ex-Soviet power, and
might be soon subject to its power, at least in the scope of Middle Eastern
policy.
This article does not suggest that Al
Assad will be hailed by western governments as the saviour of the Arab world from the ISIS wrath, but it proposes that he will indeed
be tolerated. To influence people, beliefs must be addressed: if people believe
that only limited solutions are available, and that these solutions necessarily
include maintaining the current regime, then the newly introduced and accepted capitalist and
democratic system in a post-Communist region, is no different than maintaining
an autocratic, yet stable system in a post-ISIS region.
References
- Kim, J. (2013) Conceptualising Influence and Power of EU Agencies in European Policy Making, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
- Mokken, R. and Stokman, F. (1989) Power and Influence as Political Phenomena, in Barry B. (ed.) Democracy, Power and Justice: Essays in Political Theory (pp.33-54), Oxford, Clarendon Press.
- Zimmerling, R. (2005) Influence and Power, Dordrecht, Springer.
Comments
Post a Comment