Russia and the Unpleasant Phenomenon of “Peace in Wartime”
TEHRAN (Defapress) - Dmitriy Trenin, Chairman of the Russian International Affairs Council: The dilemma of 'war or peace' is incorrect in the current situation. If we mean only an armed confrontation, then it will probably end in the foreseeable future. The endless continuation of a war of attrition is not in Russia’s interests. Moscow needs a victory; a victory that is quite possible, provided that important decisions are made both inside the country and on the fronts. However, even after the end of the armed conflict, there will be no complete peace, and the confrontation with the West will continue in various spheres and in various forms.
This confrontation will be long. This will require something that Russia has long lacked: Long-term goal-setting and a well-thought-out strategy for achieving goals. Russia’s main goal in this war should be the creation of a Russian state-civilization; Moscow has officially announced this goal, but has not yet even defined it. This state-civilization seems to be a project for the formation of a society based on the solidarity of citizens and common fundamental values such as faith, freedom, family, and justice. In this regard, it is logical to talk about a deep modernization of the Russian economic and political system.
Such a project cannot be the monopoly of the elite alone. The elite itself also needs generational modernization, as well as the definition of new mechanisms for its own reproduction and relations with the majority of society. Along with these issues, meritocracy is certainly necessary, but not sufficient; the ideological and value content of the elite’s activity and their commitment to service are as important as competence and professionalism.
Only an idea that becomes a “national idea” is capable of transforming Russia; then we can say that the Ukrainian war, with its enormous pressure and irreparable losses, will become a prelude to the creation of a new situation in this country.
In such a situation, the newly established relationship between society and the state will also determine Russia’s position on the world stage. In this situation, Russia can become a stronger “pole”. But most importantly for Russia itself, it is necessary to avoid the prospect of forced annexation to the largest geoeconomic and geopolitical formations, namely, the Euro-Atlantic and China.
The reliance in this struggle should be primarily on Russia itself. Belarus is part of the single Russian homeland. The fraternity of arms with North Korea has been cemented by blood. Russia values strategic partnership relations with China, but Moscow must understand that Beijing always pursues its national interests first and foremost. The same applies to Russia’s other partners in the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian Economic Union, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, BRICS, and other independent countries of the world.
After the end of World War II, three generations of Russians were brought up in the external security environment: first in conditions of strategic stability based on mutual nuclear deterrence with the United States, then in conditions of partnership and cooperation in a world where “world war” was considered an outdated phenomenon. Now we are at a stage where the security paradigm itself is obsolete. “War in peace” or “peace in war” is the new unpleasant reality. The only way forward for Russia in this situation is to accept, to endure a long and hard struggle, and ultimately, to transform and win. There is no turning back, and the only alternative to victory is to collapse.
