RUSSIA AS A VANGUARD OF EUROPE

Ambassador Rogozin

Reply to Dmitri Rogozin's Article on  Russia and Europe

Ответ на статью Дмитрия Рогозина об отношениях между Россией и Европой 
Risposta all' articolo di Dmitri Rogozin sui rapporti fra Russia ed Europa
Réponse à l'article  de Dmitri Rogozin sur les rapports entre la Russie et l'Europe
Antwort zu Dmitri Rogozins Artikel ueber Russland und Europa

The article of His Excellence Dmitry Rogozin "Repeating the abduction of Europe (in http://natomission.ru/en/society/article/society/artnews/42/) touches some themes which are at the center of my blog http://www.europestwolongs.blogspot.com, with a freedom of judgment which is appreciable in a diplomat.

Although we completely subscribe to the central thesis of Mr. Rogozin, i.e., that “juxtaposing Europe and Russia” amounts to “a profound delusion and misinterpreting the whole is blind to history”, we have some precisions to add as to certain aspects of the mutual relationships of these two areas, which are dealt with in details in our blog.

1.Europe, the West and the South

I remark preliminary that the Straights of Bering and even Vladivostok are much more “eastern” than Indonesia proper and the island of Moro in the Philippines, the more Eastern countries of Islamic Faith, and that Senegal and Morocco, the most Western parts of Islam, are more “Western” than Iceland and Portugal.

In practice, the “West” is in reality just the North of the Planet, and both Europe and Russia, but also the United States and Canada, belong to it. At its turn, the Islamic town of Kazan is on the same parallel of Moscow, Edinburgh and Belfast, i. es., more “Northern” than Berlin, Paris, London and Brussels. So, one has to be cautions in utilizing geographic metaphors for designating cultural identities.

The latter may be traced, and even with difficulty, thanks to historical, philosophical and political concepts, more than to geographic ones.

Personally, I find that “Western Civilizations” are characterized first of all by their common descent from the Old Testament; hence, they include both Islam and Western Secularism, but all of them differ from the “Eastern” traditions of San Jião and from the “Southern” traditions of animism and pantheism.

Within this broad “Western Cultural Area” there is a “tighter” “circle”of “European” culture, which is characterized by the acceptance of the continuity of the Roman tradition, through the “Translatio Imperî” via the “Three Romes”; hence, Western Europe, Russia and Turkey, whilst the USA, the Shiite Islamic countries and Israel do not want to pertain to this “core Europe”, because they reject a legitimization through the theory of the “Three Romes”, seeking their own, messianic, forms of historical legitimation.

2.Russia in Europe

The whole of my blog is devoted to void the prejudice, which His Excellence very appropriately calls “Repeating the abduction of Europe”, according to which Europe and Russia are “completely distinct civilizations with manifestly dissimilar values”.

My blog tries to demonstrate this point of view by dealing with a lot of specific historical and cultural phases, where the role of Russia and of Europe is absolutely interchangeable (migrations of the peoples, Eastern and Græco-Roman influences, Absolutism, Enlightenment, European Federalism, Romanticism, Nationalism, Marxism, a s.o.).I hope that my objective has been achieved, since statistics show that a growing number of readers oall over Europe are following attentively my posts.

3.West and South

According to my point of view, the “South” of the World should not encompass Islam, which is so similar to Europe that many if the characteristics of Europe came even from it. When young, the present Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan used to say that, should all Europeans convert to Islam, nobody would even perceive a difference.

Let’s mention the objective of the unification of the World which was anticipated in Dante’s idea of the Christian Empire, but whose model was the Caliphate; the main features of Catholic and Evangelic theologies (aristotelism, averroism, thomism); the national characters of Spain, Southern Italy and the Balcanic States (besides the ones of many Republics of the Russian Federation) which are deeply impressed by mysticism, Islamic architecture and Arabic or Turkish linguistics.

It is true that Islam participates, today, to an external pressure exerted on “the West” by other parts of the World, for changing the  present cultural and political balance of the same. However, this pressure does not come, primarily, from Islam, which is partially “internal” to the West, and is also politically weak, but, rather, from the Far East. The changes which will likely derive from these pressures are an open question, that needs to be addressed attentively by public opinions, intellectuals and authorities. However, some form of change is needed in Europe’s best interest, because the present balance of the West is too much unbalanced Westwards, so that many “typically European” values, like spirituality, culture, excellence, are sacrificed to performance, economy, technology, profit, and this leads to that overall cultural crisis of Western Europe that the Ambassador correctly denounces.

Such balance shift would not not mean, according to us, a demise of the European Identity, but, on the contrary, the re-discovery of its most deep-rooted origins, which include the ancient Middle East, the Peoples of the Steppes, the Arab Philosophy as well as the heritage of the German, Russian, Austrian and Ottoman Empires.

According to us, a Europe which would become more “Eastern and Southern” will be much nearer to Russia than the Europe of today. At the end of the day, the Polovcy of the Slovo o Polku Igoreva, the Khazars,the Shagané, Hadji Murad, Chakovskij and Diagilev are  an integral  part of  Russian Culture, in the same way as Averroes, Suleiman the Magnificent and Orhan Pamuk are full-fledged Europeans.

4.The Role of Russia

We agree that, so as his Excellence affirms,  Russia is exercising already now a role as a guardian of European culture. That role was expressed very appropriately, in his times, by Tjutchev, by his expression “the Russian Arch”, which has been utilized again by Sokurov, for his film bearing the same name. This expression means that Russia has absorbed so much the culture of Europe, that it is in a condition to preserve such culture inside itself even in these times, when it risks to be overwhelmed by globalization.

However, it is globalization, not “the South”, that endangers Europe’s culture and future.

As outlined in our blog, we recognise a certain  well-groundedness in the idea that Europe is culturally in decadence, and Russia is in the side of the future. This idea has not been invented either by Russian nationalists, nor by the newly born Russian Federation, but, on the contrary, has been a constant theme for a large part of European intelligencija, from Križanić to Kühlmann, from Leibniz to Herder, from Von Baader to Krüdener, from De Maistre to Nietzsche.

In the present days’ turmoil of the European Union, Russia is indeed the sole country with a clear cut vision for the future of the whole Continent, and having the means for implementing it.

However, this extraordinary opportunity, that Russia presently has, could be jeopardized easily, as it happened after the Congress of Vienna, when Russia did not succeed to have its proposals about the nature of the Holy Alliance endorsed  by Austria and England, and this brought about a continuous conflict between Great Powers and nationalities.

Joseph De Maistre, author of “Les Soirees de St. Petersburg”, whilst leaving his long-term assignment as the Ambassador in Russia of the Kingdom of Sardinia, affirmed: “Russia could have done so much for Europe but has done nothing”.

For being able to exploit the present opportunities, both Russia and Europe should focus much more on the study of their cultural traditions and on the ways in which they could foster cooperation alongside such traditions.

5.From the Atlantic to Urals

It is also true that today De Gaulle’s slogan is outdated. First of all, De Gaulle left the power more than 40 years ago, and the world has changed dramatically, emphasizing large distances and brood spaces.

Secondly, he was, unfortunately, no more successful, in implementing his vision, than Tsar Aleksandr 1^st in implementing his one.

It goes without saying that Russia is not limited to Urals, but includes also Siberia, Donji Vostok and a lot of Asiatic Republics.

A project for a really united Europe should have a consideration also for the future of such territories.

It is also true that Russia is doing very much in Siberia, and the visit of Nr. Barroso and Mr. Solana in Khabarovsk should have been very instructive for them under this point of view.

It is true, finally, that economic cooperation with West Europeans for Siberia will be the best way for assuring the European character of that area. Very good examples exist, such as the collaboration with the Italian Alenia and Pininfarina, for the production, in Komsomolsk na Amure, of the “Sukhoi Superjet 100”. However, long term problems for Siberia exist, and they should become an item of Euro-Russian discussions.

6.Operational suggestions

We hope that the article of Mr. Rogozin will be useful for persuading diplomatic, political and cultural circles, that a further reflection on the theme of the cultural interrelationships between Russia and Europe is urgent, for being able to lay the grounds of a necessary cooperation between the two areas in many and many fields.

Our blog cited above is a first tentative to find a ground where, by the utilization of modern technologies, Europeans of the East  and of the West may discuss about their common problems.

We would be happy to have also the Ambassador Rogozin and other Russian diplomats on our pages.

FEDERATION, UNION, MARKET,COMMUNITY

NATO and Warsaw Pact

 

Russian and  European Terminologies Overlapping

Русская и Европейская терминологии совпадают

Le terminologie russa ed Europea si sovrappongono

Les terminologies russe et européennes se juxtaposent 

Die russische und die Europaeische prallen zusammen 

 

 

1.Heritages of the blocks

Somebody  has pretended that the Communist block arisen in Europe after World War II (or the Soviet Union itself) constituted a sort of anticipation of present days European Union .In fact, Evgenij Primakov has called it “European Union n. I”. It is not a secret that Primakov is favourable to the accessoion of Russia into the European Union.We could say that institutions like the Warsaw Pact and the Comecon were created just for contradicting NATO and Common Market, but were based on the same idea of the latter, i.e. as an ideological, and non continental, block. From another point of view, albeit we maintain our persuasion that the very core of the European project is not an ideologic, but a geopolitical issue, we admit that somebody could suggest that also the European Union was an ideologic reality, arisen out of a “Western” agenda.Notwithstanding all of the foregoing, the fact so large parts of Europe have lived within for a so long period within the framework of the same system, and with the same - logical, theoretical, political - patterns, has contributed to the creation of a more widespread “common language”. It has also to be said that what is common of this language has been often also the one of nationalities and of conflicts, and that is used now for dividing Europeans (Republics against Russians, Albanians against Serbs, Armenians against Azeris). However, there is at least a common legal and organizational style and a common sociological typology, which is not completely useless in absolute, and could ever constitute a working tool for European politicians willing to really cope with problems like continental cooperation and curing the excess of national suprematisms. 

  Unfortunately, many of the positive aspects of the former East European sovrannational organizations, as, for instance, the attention to long lasting economic cooperation, are no more perceivable in the area. Another aspect of the former East Block States is, paradoxically, the loss influence of those movements of “dissent” which, for a certain period, seemed to be a common element for all Central and Eastern European societies. It is true that these movements were weak, without a common ground, and too much depending on foreign influence. So that it is easy to explain why, after the Fall of the Berlin Wall, they disappeared, leaving space to very Western-type parties and ideologies. Even intellectuals, like Kadaré or Havel, who had widespread, in the past, a culturalist, national and elitist message, changed dramatically their messages after the fall of the Wall, homologating it to the requirements of the West, and forgetting the national particularities which had rendered live the same messages. Only Sol’zenitzin did not rally with this trend and continued, also after the fall of Communism, to defend its own patriotic and Christian point of view.

 Paradoxically, only certain authors which, at the end, were, at least partially ,integrated into the system, like, for instance, Wajda, Lem,Zanussi,Sol'zhenitsin,Kusturica,Tarkovski, Kolakowski, Kieszlowski, succeeded, thanks to the gaps of the old system,  to create, in the Eastern Block,during  the transition period, "classical" works which denoted a total distance both from the Marxist ideology, and from the economicist Western world, especially in cinematography (Andrej Rubljov, Sol’aris, Stalker,Lotna, Kalwaria Polska, Dekalog, Otac je u delovim put, Slike ot zhivota udarnika) .

2. Europe, a Federation of Empires

Coming to the merits of Primakov’s contention, we cannot deny that both the Soviet Union and the European Union have been the heirs of the same political thinking, which, as the outcome of a century-old federalist tradition, had reclaimed the reconstruction of a general European order in substitution of the Roman Empire. The idea itself of the “Third Rome” was originated, in last instance, by the necessity of a succession to the Constantinian Tetrarchy, which had been the first case of general political organization of Christian Europe. This tradition went on through Bohemia, France and Germany during the 15^th, 16^th, 17^th and 18^th Centuries.

The best known of these project, the “Projet de Paix Perpetuelle” of St. Pierre, included Russia (and, initially,also  the Ottoman Empire) in the new European Organization, which should have guaranteed peace for two whole of Europe.

Also the “Greek Project” (for the Greeks, “i Megàli Idèa”) was intended, by Leibniz, as the unification of the whole of Europe, alongside the model of the Qin Empire in China. Then, the “Russian” version of the Holy Alliance spoke of a “Europe of the Peoples”.

Also at the moment of creating the Soviet Union, Bolsheviks took inspiration from the teaching of “Austro-Marxists”, who, in their turn, draw their inspiration from the constitutional traditions of the late Ottoman, Austrian and German Empires, which had known large forms of federalism, such as the one of the German States inside the 2^nd Reich, the “compromise” between Austria and Hungary, as well as the representation of Nationalities (Milletler) at the Ottoman Empire’s level.

But also Coudenhove-Kalergi, the Greek-Czech-Austrian founder of “Paneuropa” was inspired by the Austria’s constitutional tradition.

1.Federation/Federacija; Market/Rynok;Community/Soobscestvo; Union/Sojuz.

Even the terminologies utilized were similar: “Soviet Union” and “European Union”; “Common Market” and “Eurasiatic Market”; “European Communities” and “Community of Independent States”; “Russian Federation” and “European Federation”.

The matter is too complex for being dealt with here in a comprehensive manner. It may be sufficient to take note of some fundamental aspects.

First of all, all these terminologies cover very different realities, some of them being extinct, others still leaving, some having remained at the stage of a draft, others presently under completion. Some of them were centralized and despotic to the maximum extent, others were, or are, extremely loose.

Finally, all of these concepts and realities changed without interruption over the time: the Russian Sovietic Republic became the Soviet Union, which, at its turn, gave rise to the Russian Federation and to the Community of Independent States, where, today, some Republics, like Russia, Belarus and Kazakhistan, would like to create a Eurasiatic Common Market. Reversals, the European Communities have been transformed, present days, into European Union.

So, even taking into account the specificities of each institution and of each specific moment of time and political situation, all these similarities means that we are not just utilizing the same wordings, but we are confronted with the same type of problems. This will probably bring us again to face these problems with a common approach.