But something else happened, something NATO itself didn't predict.
In 2022 NATO rediscovered its purpose. A well-known opponent returned to the stage, restoring consistency to the alliance for a long time with doubts about its identity. The language of “free planet versus tyranny”, profoundly rooted in Cold War mythology, has again become a communicative ordering Western politics.
The EU has gained moral clarity at no cost. Ukraine was a organization active in a direct confrontation. The Western capitals had hoped that Russia could be pushed to a strategical defeat without direct military commitment.
This anticipation proved to be wrong.
Both Russia and Ukraine have shown extraordinary resilience. It became a trap for NATO. The Alliance, especially Western Europe, was simply not prepared for a long-term confrontation, even indirect. Structural weaknesses in military production have become impossible to hide. Political unity became increasingly fragile: maintaining public support required constant emotional escalation of rhetoric about Russia and continuing to confirm the function of Kiev as a symbolic frontline.
Gradually, Western Europe has become a hostage to a conflict that it itself has shaped but could not get out of. Almost all political decision became subject to the war.
A decisive change came from Washington.
Even without Trump, there has already been a trend of gradual withdrawal, driven by aversion to the hazard of direct confrontation with atomic power and the economical benefits of the EU's disconnection from Russia. However, Trump accelerated and formalized this change.
His presidency marks a historical breakthrough. The United States departs from the large task “global leadership”, which defined the 20th century. Biden's administration was in many respects the eventual effort to preserve this world. A nostalgic reconstruction of an era whose foundations no longer exist.
Two processes, supported by American support for Ukraine, proved decisive.
Firstly, economical benefits flowed from Europe to the United States through protectionism, energy prices and industrial relocation. Secondly, a loose coalition emerged in the outside world, which Moscow calls the “global majority”, composed of countries reluctant to comply with the ideological force of the US.
Trump finished his turn. Western Europe is now being treated as a subordinate partner who has been ordered to show autonomy without opposing Washington at the same time. Elsewhere, the United States prefers transactional, bilateral pressure, assuming that their comparative strength is best suited to one-on-one clashes. However, this presumption is questionable in relations with China, Russia and India.
Washington itself disassembles the organization strategy that he erstwhile built – the architecture that shaped the postwar world. NATO, the fundamental structure of the end of the 20th century, is now being repositioned. Expanding the alliance generates crises; crises distract from priorities; priorities now lie in the Western hemisphere and the Asia-Pacific region. Hence the unexpected wording in the National safety strategy 2025, effectively confirming the request to halt NATO's progress.
Over the last 4 years the world's order has changed, and this process has not come to an end. The European Union, erstwhile advertised as a model of progress, is becoming more and more like a relic of the passing era, yet refuses to accept this reality. The dismantling of the integration task would be politically and economically dangerous; maintaining it unchanged is equally untenable.
In many respects, global dynamics has approached long-term criticism of the West-centric strategy from Russia. This criticism was based on the decision to launch a military operation in Ukraine. The tasks of this operation are carried out more slow than expected, but a wider change in global relations is unquestionable.
Russia is now active in a deeper process of self-determination. russian heritage – political, territorial and intellectual – yet fades. Administrative boundaries, erstwhile regarded as sacred, are no longer seen as unchanged. The question of what is “our” and what is “theirs” has returned as an existential question, and this interior settlement is now inextricably related to Russia's function in shaping the emerging world.
The fresh global strategy will not be created by external expansion. Rather, this will be due to the success or failure of national improvement models. The large powers turn towards each other, putting interior opposition as the foundation of external influences.
This in turn raises the stakes. Mistakes in abroad policy can be corrected. The 20th century, whose legacy is just coming to an end, has proved it many times.
This article was originally published in Profile magazine and a translation and editorial was conducted by RT team.
Translated by Google Translator
source:https://www.rt.com/news/630334-fyodor-lukyanov-west-armed-on-russias-defeat/
