Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reaffirmed at the beginning of this month while speaking at the 29th Assembly of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy that his country practices a strictly non-ideological foreign policy. In his words:
“Unlike the United States, we don’t have ideological biases, ideological taboos in our relations with foreign partners. However, this is actually our advantage – methodological and practical, since it allows us to play an active mediating role in resolving the conflicts that we consider important to keep on the agenda, to maintain contacts with all players without exceptions.”
This is the key to its 21st-century balancing act which aims to position the Eurasian Great Power as the supreme balancing force on the supercontinent. In particular, it explains Russia’s excellent relations with rival pairs Armenia/Azerbaijan, China/India, China/Vietnam, Croatia/Serbia, “Israel”/Iran, Syria/Turkey, and others.
Contrary to the false narratives spread by many key influencers in the Alt-Media Community (AMC) over the years, Russia is not anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-Islamist, anti-Western, or anti-Zionist, though this doesn’t by default mean that it’s pro- any of those either. It simply engages with all parties that treat it with respect.
The only three things that Russia is unquestionably against are the interconnected issues of fascism, World War II revisionism, and UN revisionism. These are widely considered to be contrary to universal values so that doesn’t make Russia exceptional or ideological in any case, but consistent with international norms.
It’s important for observers to keenly understand all of this lest they be misled by fake news charlatans into thinking that Russia is something that it’s not. There’s plenty of disinformation out there propagated by the country’s foes and putative “friends” alike aimed are manipulating perceptions about the country’s policies.
What many Non-Russian Pro-Russians (NRPR) have been misled into thinking is the country’s anti-American/-Western foreign policy is nothing more than its support for the same international laws that the US and its allies violate in pursuit of their rogue UN revisionist goals.
There’s a difference between being anti-American/-Western and being in support of international law. The first implies the impossibility of pragmatic cooperation on ideological grounds while the second suggests that such cooperation is possible so long as it conforms with international law.
If Russia was truly anti-American/-Western, then it wouldn’t remind the world of its intent to work closely with those countries on issues of shared interest. President Putin doesn’t meet with his relevant counterparts in order to “keep your enemy closer” like some NRPRs imagine, but in order to advance dialogue and cooperation.
The same can be said about Russian-Turkish relations, which many NRPRs have been misled by the pro-Syrian faction of the AMC into thinking are characterized by an irreconcilable ideological divide caused by Moscow’s supposedly principled opposition to Islamism. Nothing could be further from the truth.
While a transregional rivalry between these historically competing Great Powers is veritably in effect, it’s manageable for the moment at least precisely because President Putin doesn’t mind cooperating with his Turkish counterpart in the interests of peace, stability, and development despite him being an Islamist.
The same can be said about Russia’s ties with the Taliban, which is banned by the Kremlin as a terrorist group despite that same government pragmatically cooperating with it in the interests of peace and security. Moscow also supports the participation of Syria’s non-terrorist armed Islamist opposition in the Astana peace process.
For some bizarre reason, many NRPR have been indoctrinated by key AMC influencers into thinking that Russia is “anti-Zionist”. It isn’t, at all, since “Israel” is the country’s de facto ally and arguably among its top partners anywhere in the world despite differences over how to resolve the Palestinian Question and some other issues.
Russia’s anti-terrorist intervention in Syria wasn’t driven by “anti-Zionist” goals like some imagined due to Tel Aviv’s support of a few terrorist groups there, but purely by non-ideological security concerns. The unprecedentedly excellent state of Russian-”Israeli” relations since then confirms this objective observation.
The purpose in pointing all of this out is make those in the AMC aware of how they’ve been manipulated by some key influencers into imagining that Russia is something that it isn’t. The country’s diplomats and especially its present leader are firmly opposed to letting ideological factors influence their foreign policy.
Those who claim otherwise are lying for reasons that only they can account for if publicly challenged to do so, ideally after being made aware of Lavrov’s strong statement on this matter which they can’t credibly deny was made. Some might claim that it’s just “5D chess”, but the use of that excuse proves that the person is a liar.
Sincere NRPRs acknowledge Russia’s non-ideological foreign policy even if they might wish that it was somewhat different or they disagree in principle with Russia’s pragmatic engagement with one or another international actor which they regard as representing an ideology that they’re personally opposed to.
The primary reason why many in the AMC struggle to produce accurate analyses of Russian foreign policy is precisely because they remain under the delusion that the country’s pertinent policies are ideologically driven. Upon correcting this false perception, the community will finally begin producing quality content.
Source: One World