12 September 2013
Russian President Vladimir V. Putin released an Op-Ed piece
published in the New York Times on
September 11, 2013, that has created an uproar.
At the end of the piece, President Putin seemed to call into question
American exceptionalism. This mistaken
interpretation of what he said has raised the hackles of some supposedly
serious experts in foreign policy such as Senator John McCain (R-AZ) and
Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), who is the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee. The punditocracy are in a
similar state of emotional distress.
It would be wrong of serious foreign policy analysts to
react emotionally to what Putin said and seemed to say. They should instead be looking for insights
provided by this most serious practitioner of the diplomatic arts.
Let us take at face value the claim that Putin actually
called into question American exceptionalism.
This would be no different than what President Obama said himself!
On April 4, 2009, in Strasbourg, France, in response to a
question put to him by Mr. Ed Luce of the Financial
Times, President Obama said,
“I believe
in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British
exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism….”
If Putin called into question American exceptionalism he would
have said nothing more than what President Obama apparently believes: that there
is nothing exceptional about American exceptionalism. At worst, this interpretation of what Putin
said amounts to a dig at President Obama, whom Putin has completely
out-maneuvered on the matter of Syria and chemical weapons.
However, this is not what he said. What Putin actually did was to call into
question the wisdom of relying upon the premise of exceptionalism as a basis
for making foreign policy decisions.
That is food for thought, not a basis for an emotional reaction.
The argument by which Putin justifies his advice is a non sequitor, however. After talking about countries large and
small, rich and poor, democratic and non-democratic, he says,
“We are all
different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessing, we must not forget that God
created us equal.”
The statement is a non
sequitor because in the eyes of God, each individual human being is equal,
while previously Putin was referred to countries and in this line he refers to
individuals.
Putin is undoubtedly aware that the Declaration of
Independence and the Constitution are full of the concept of the equality of
individuals before and under the law, and that this principle of equality was
justified because of the belief that we are all equal before God.
This may be what Putin thinks is a clever dig before a
world-wide audience at the contradictions of American political philosophy:
that all men are created equal and yet America is the greatest country in the
world.
The reason why his statement is a non sequitor is the difference between millions of individuals on
the one hand, and a society and a country on the other. This difference explains why the society and
country made up of these three hundred million individuals who collectively
comprise the greatest country in the world, while those three hundred million
who live in some province in China do not.
Thus the seeming contradiction between the equality of the individual
and the inequality of country and society is resolved.
What serious observers ought to take from this argument that
President Putin makes are that he is a close observer of America, and of the
political power of Christian beliefs and consequently of the Russian Orthodox
Church in Russia. Putin, in his public
remarks, has often hinted that he is a Christian believer. As a former KGB agent, Putin may not be a
believer, but it apparently is important to him that he seem to be. Dealing with Putin then on his home turf, it
would be important to frame public positions on the principles of Christian
belief.
The rest of Putin’s Op-Ed also provides food for serious
thought. In the first place, it reads as
being sensible, reasonable, and sincere.
It may stick in the craw of people to think that a reasonable sounding
argument from President Putin would be sincere, but the important take away is
that a lot of people around the world who are not emotionally invested in
America will think it sounds reasonable and sensible. If America wants to rally the world behind a
policy in Syria contrary to Russian wishes, President Obama is going to have to
be a lot better in putting his case. So
far, on Syria, he has looked like a slow-footed puncher, while Putin looks like
Mohammed Ali in his prime.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment