The Declining West

You will recall that Vice President Kamala Harris led an American delegation to a Munich Security Conference last February. She took the occasion to tell Russia not to invade Ukraine. A week later Russia invaded Ukraine. Apparently, it took the veep’s words, not to say the flabby rhetoric of the Biden administration, as an affront.

And while we are talking about the diplomatic failures that led to the invasion of Ukraine, why not say a word about another inept political leader, Britain’s then Foreign Secretary, Liz Truss. 

For having failed miserably in her negotiation with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Truss is about to be anointed the prime minister of Great Britain. Or, should we say, Once-Great Britain.

For those who do not recall it, here is Anne Applebaum’s analysis, offered six months ago, via the Atlantic:

Oh, how I envy Liz Truss her opportunity! Oh, how I regret her utter failure to make use of it! For those who have never heard of her, Truss is the lightweight British foreign secretary who went to Moscow this week to tell her Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, that his country should not invade Ukraine. This trip was not a success. At a glacial press conference he likened their conversation to “the mute” speaking with “the deaf”; later, he leaked the fact that she had confused some Russian regions with Ukrainian regions, to add a little insult to the general injury.

Being a lightweight, Truss did not know what was about to happen to her. But, Applebaum notes, she should have. Lavrov had done this many times before. His hostility and aggressiveness toward Western leaders, leaders he obviously considers to be weak, is not a secret.

So, Liz Truss allowed herself to be slapped down, put in her place, by a man who is highly skilled in such matters.

Now, Applebaum considers that Western leaders have misunderstood Russia:

Tragically, the Western leaders and diplomats who are right now trying to stave off a Russian invasion of Ukraine still think they live in a world where rules matter, where diplomatic protocol is useful, where polite speech is valued. All of them think that when they go to Russia, they are talking to people whose minds can be changed by argument or debate. They think the Russian elite cares about things like its “reputation.” It does not.

Here, Applebaum has misread the situation. In sending Kamala Harris to Munich or in dispatching Liz Truss to negotiate with Sergei Lavrov, the West was talking down to  Russia. It was projecting weakness and threatening face, that is, the public reputation, of Russian leaders.

We might believe that girl power is just the thing, and that it is good to have strong, empowered women running foreign policy. Apparently, the Russians consider it an insult to be lectured by a lightweight who owes her job to her gender. 

So, this bring us to Nancy Pelosi, another lightweight, who inserted herself into a dispute between China and Taiwan. Serious people, people who have some understanding of the stakes at play, advised her against going, but strong, empowered Nancy wanted to strut her stuff on the world stage. 

So, she decided to mess up American relations with China by visiting Taiwan. We should not fail to mention that such relations have been on a downward trajectory for several years now. The tough talk and tough actions of the Trump administration were not constructive. Macho bluster is not a good foreign policy move. It is a sign of weakness.

Anyway, the Biden administration, in its incoherent foreign policy, declared that it did not want Pelosi to go to Taiwan. She did it anyway. The Chinese government chose to believe that the administration’s words were inconsequential-- an effort to trick them into thinking that Nancy had gone rogue.

China has been responding to what they consider to be a serious affront, a threat to face. Those who are familiar with my own work on the question of “face” will have a better understanding of the state of play.

As of now, China has been conducting military exercises around Taiwan. It has effectively blockaded the island. For what it is worth, average Chinese citizens, for whom the unity of China is not a mere intellectual exercise, think that their government has been too soft.

Consider the analysis offered by Pepe Escobar, on Zero Hedge:

The day after, as the narcissist Speaker, so proud of accomplishing her stunt, was awarded the Order of Auspicious Clouds for her promotion of bilateral US-Taiwan relations, the Chinese Foreign Minister issued a sobering comment: the reunification of Taiwan with the mainland is a historical inevitability.

That’s how you focus, strategically, in the long game.

What happens next had already been telegraphed, somewhat hidden in a Global Times report. Here are the two key points:

Point 1: “China will see it as a provocative action permitted by the Biden administration rather than a personal decision made by Pelosi.”

How does Xi read the situation? He sees the United States as suffering from serious misgovernment. He sees us as yesterday’s power, staging theatrical events in order to pretend still to be in charge. While Pelosi is second in the line of succession, her position, however august it is, involves no real responsibility for making foreign policy.

And Escobar thinks that China is simply playing the long game regarding reunification. 

Point 2 concerns the consequences, reflecting a consensus among top Chinese analysts that mirrors the consensus at the Politburo:

 “The Russia-Ukraine crisis has just let the world see the consequence of pushing a major power into a corner… China will steadily speed up its process of reunification and declare the end of US domination of the world order.”

The latter involves the reserve status of the United States dollar.

Escobar suggests that President Xi has suffered a loss of face, and that he will certainly respond:

This may be seen as Xi playing Chairman Mao. He may have a point, but the rhetoric is pro forma. The crucial fact is that Xi was personally humiliated by Washington and so was the Communist Party of China (CPC), a major loss of face – something that in Chinese culture is unforgivable. And all that compounded with a US tactical victory.

So the response will be inevitable, and it will be classic Sun Tzu: calculated, precise, tough, long-term and strategic – not tactical.

That takes time because Beijing is not ready yet in an array of mostly technological domains. Putin had to wait years for Russia to act decisively. China’s time will come.

Dare we say that this is not very encouraging. Dare we add that the inept Pelosi has done damage to American foreign policy. One also notes that the president of South Korea, unwilling to threaten the face of his neighbor, refused to interrupt his vacation to meet with Nancy.

So, Eastern powers see the West in decline. We champion diversity by giving jobs to people on the basis of race and gender. And we care more about whether our military is diverse than whether it can win wars.

While Russia and China and India and other countries are working to ensure that their people will have a sufficient quantity of energy, we are shutting down energy production, and are fighting the good fight, against the weather.

We have not merely been projecting weakness on the world stage. We have also been showing gross incompetence. Look at who is running America today. Would you think that a nation led by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris is in charge of its policy? Or do you think that it is merely going through the motions, lost and befuddled, incapable of pronouncing a coherent sentence without reading off of note cards.

Say what you will about the evil people leading our adversaries, they did not get their jobs to fill a diversity quota. They are professionals; they know their brief. When they deal with Western political leaders they manifest contempt, not so much because our leaders represent democratic nations, but because our leaders are grossly incompetent. It is insulting to have to deal with such people.