Ukraine crisis has brought US’ naive foreign policy into sharp focus
- The US is convinced Russia will be politically and economically impotent, European nations will return to their place under American’s wing, and the threat of sanctions will keep China in line
- But what happens if both Russia and China call the US’ bluff?
Fukuyama’s position deems Ukraine as an attestation of Pax Americana being resurrected, in that it is only a matter of time before Russia collapses, as the Soviet Union did in the aftermath of its invasion of Afghanistan.
Russian President Vladimir Putin launched “special military actions” into Ukraine on February 24, claiming that Nato’s incessant expansion eastward threatened Russia’s national security, leaving him no choice but to push back.
A feel-good atmosphere permeates Washington. It is confident that it has benefited from Putin’s ill-conceived actions, and that Russia, now proven to be weak even on the battlefield, will fade into economic and political impotence, that the erstwhile wavering European nations are returning to their place under the US’ wing, and that China is daunted by the severity of the sanctions imposed on Russia. Capital flight to the US is the nice usual windfall, of course.
Only a handful of American observers, such as John Mearsheimer and, to a lesser extent, Niall Ferguson, have aired their concerns about the negative implications of Washington’s adamant stance.
Mearsheimer’s criticism of Nato’s eastward expansion, which he maintains served to unnecessarily alienate Russia when America needs to focus on China as its chief rival, prompted students at the University of Chicago where he is a tenured professor to call for him to disclose the Russian sources of his funding and for the university community to state that it does not condone “anti-Ukrainian ideology”.
Ferguson expressed unease at the unrealistic optimism of many commentators, as well as the Biden administration, about Ukraine’s capacity to fight indefinitely.
Why China is refusing to choose between Russia and Ukraine
Following the announcement of the latest summit between Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the US president “will make clear that China will bear responsibility for any actions it takes to support Russia’s aggression and we will not hesitate to impose costs”.
During the Biden-Xi virtual meeting on Friday, Biden described to Xi “implications and consequences” if Beijing provides “material support” to Russia, according to the White House announcement after the summit.
In these columns in the past, I have discussed the naivety of American diplomacy; my fear now is that the current developments in Ukraine are bringing this into sharp focus.
Beijing is convinced that Washington is determined to foil its rise to the status of superpower. Moscow is pushing back against Nato, even though Russia has been steadily reduced to a weakling in the international arena over the past three decades.
Both China and Russia are trying to secure their existential interests, but Washington shouts “good-versus-evil” slogans at them, relying on its still-unrivalled military and financial power.
Now, with Putin throwing down the gauntlet to the US, and with Beijing refusing to abandon Moscow in the belief that China is locked in the US’ crosshairs anyway, Washington’s decision to simultaneously take on two formidable rivals is ominously fraught with danger.
What if Putin, cornered or emboldened over Ukraine, calls the US’ bluff and presses on, acting against Nato’s East European members, or in the Middle East or Korean peninsula, or even resorting to nuclear warfare?
Washington is dominated by ethical narratives, as borne out by George Soros’ passionate declaration in September 2019 that “my interest in defeating Xi Jinping’s China goes beyond US national interests”. It’s just that, when the grand die is cast, as seems the case in Ukraine now, the world probably will brace for, not biblical Parousia, but another turn of history’s “eternal recurrence” in the Nietzschean sense.
Terry Su is president of Lulu Derivation Data Ltd, a Hong Kong-based online publishing house and think tank specialising in geopolitics