Complimenting this viewpoint is the YouTube, Lavrov: West stuck with Cold War mentality (UN Gen Assembly Full Q&A). If Lavrov is correct that the NeoCon American foreign policy after the collapse of the Soviet empire has positioned itself
to become the single dominating armed force on the planet, what other results but an unending warfare environment can one
expect? Longing for an enemy to keep the military machine in high gear certainly is perceived by the rest of the world as
Blogger Nick Freiling presents
an assessment in, What the others are saying, of the following Lavrov quotation.
“In attempting to establish their pre-eminence at a time when new economic, financial and political
power centres are emerging, the Americans provoke counteraction in keeping with Newton’s third law and contribute to
the emergence of structures, mechanisms, and movements that seek alternatives to the American recipes for solving the pressing
problems. I am not referring to anti-Americanism, still less about forming coalitions spearheaded against the United States,
but only about the natural wish of a growing number of countries to secure their vital interests and do it the way they think
right, and not what they are told “from across the pond.”
Mr. Freiling writes his own comments.
“It’s worth noting that perspectives like these aren’t totally
absent from mainstream punditry in the U.S. Libertarians, for one, have long warned about the dangers of stretching American
resources too thin in pursuit of foreign policy initiatives that don’t have immediate national security implications.
Politicians like Rand Paul have even brought hints of such sentiments into the mainstream.
But this is still a far cry from what most Americans
consider an “orthodox” perspective on U.S. foreign policy, even if most people agree we’re overextended
in many world arenas.”
point that the Vineyard of the Saker makes, is expanded upon in the Radical Reactionary essay, Western Secularism vs. Russian Christian Revival where the background and recent direction in Russia is traced.
If you expand your analysis beyond mere political and economic context, the Lavrov foreign policy initiative
has a component of emphasizing a traditional and historic cultural motivation. While a religious factor may not have anything
to do with forging a new Russia and China alliance, dismissing a spiritual and inward revival in Russia would be a profound
Radio Free Europe in the article,
Orthodox Churches Fight Back As Eastern Europe Pushes To Modernize, Secularize, makes the case and linkage in Tradition of Religious Nationalism parallels Lavrov’s cultural autonomy.
Fagan, a Moscow-based correspondent for the religion-focused news agency Forum 18 and author of the new book "Believing
in Russia: Religious Policy After Communism," says that religious nationalism, although condemned as heresy in the 19th
century, is a profound tradition in Orthodox cultures.
"In many cases, Orthodox churches were ministering to a single ethnic group, and this
gave rise to nation-states," Fagan told RFE/RL in an e-mail. "And there is a lingering sense in places across the
Orthodox world that national security depends in a profound -- even mystical – way on the nation remaining Orthodox."
The difference of a nation state from an empire is
crucial for comprehending the nature of a legitimate government. The fall of the Soviet empire was inevitable. The notion
that an American empire will avoid the same fate is absurd.
This “Clash of Civilizations” is understandable not because either empire rode the high moral
road, but because both abandoned the fundamental principles that create a viable society and nation.
Civilization is fragile and requires a deep commitment to institutions that practice
and administer legal justice, traditional social values and high moral standards. Maintaining governments that earn the rightful
consent of its citizens is difficult and usually breaks down over time.
International affairs are even more delicate than internal equilibrium. Countries do not have
permanent allies, they only have interests. Russia has a litany of problems and is no more a friend than any other regime
that is exerting its own national self-interest.
The intrepid Brother Nathanael Kapner points the finger at THE ZIONIST HATE CAMPAIGN AGAINST RUSSIA, for an explanation why the pressitute media wants to suppress Russian nationalism. The orthodox cleric is echoing Sergey
Lavrov when he cites “For it is NATO that Moscow is opposing owing to its creeping encroachment upon Russia’s
Americans need to oppose
foreign policy adventures and certainly one that risks a global holocaust. Ready for World War III with China?, essay is just as valid when Russia is substituted. What effect would a Russian and Chinese strategic alliance have as the
NWO juggernaut continues on it current path to destruction?
Transnational Opposition to Russian Sanctions illustrates why Western countries are playing a dangerous game. Lavrov’s latest address provides a road map for
what Russia is embarking on and what the international community should do to lower the tensions and restore constructive
economic and political stability.
is not too far fetch to imagine a current day, Western version for pounding of shoes, with the message “We Will Bury You” reverberating from the halls of the UN. If this seems ridiculous, ask why pushing a Clash of Civilizations is any
SARTRE – December 2,